Adam, Eve and Me

Posted by: Anonymous

Adam, Eve and Me - 09/14/05 07:56 AM

It may sound beyond relevance of any scientific excercise but the truth as said in the Bible makes any such discussion in conflict with normaly accepted sceintific theory of evolution.
Why if he is so true says something which is not true?
So sad a religion gets rebuked for not being true to the reality.Reality as described by the Biology goes against Religion with total confidence in its undisputed correctness(it declares this to all its followers by subtly criticizing religion).
I think we should try to remove this apparent conflict with a good plausible sceintific theory assuming people who described what happened in past related their own real experience.
I assume founders of great religion were trying to relate to somthing which they really felt and which was subsequently felt by the followers.

Non Linear Evolution : What does it mean?
It means that we all someday suddenly become more aware. The Qunatum of understanding gained between the age of 16 years - 17 years (i.e 1 year)can suddenly cross the net understanding of 16 years. And it is quite possible from the defintion of TRUTH(which we discussed) to say that my world got created suddenly one day.
This explanation goes with religion and as well as with Science.Without saying who is wrong and why because it can not be proved as the defintion of truth itself has an inherent subjective attribute attached to it.
I do not want a noble prize for this but yes I would like to have genuine discussion.
Posted by: j6p

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/14/05 02:39 PM

Maybe man expects too much from a creator. We bestow impossible abilities on this entity and when our expectations aren't met, we reject the possibility of a creator.
Posted by: Uncle Al

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/14/05 03:37 PM

Quote:
but the truth as said in the Bible makes any such discussion in conflict with normaly accepted scientific theory of evolution.
Boot to the ehad. Religion is crap by definition - any empirical proof destroys faith.

http://www.restrooms.org/page03ar.html
http://www.cromwell-intl.com/toilet/
Those with the most gods have the worst toilets. Test of faith!
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/14/05 04:11 PM

dvk wrote:
"So sad a religion gets rebuked for not being true to the reality"

Why is that sad? The history of our species is one of discarding old ideas that prove invalid and replacing them with ideas that are proven more correct.

We no longer treat infections with bleeding ... we use antibiotics. Take a good serious read on your authorless books and you will find 'god' praising acts that today we call genocide, torture, rape, and murder. What is possible relevance to human's living in 2005 of nonsense written more than 4,000 years ago? Of what possible relevance to human's is a god, or his son, that were so ignorant or cruel as to not reveal penicillin? How many hundreds of millions of innocent children have died painful deaths for that act of omission.

Should religion be rebuked for hypocritically proclaiming how precious life is while ignoring the fact that it has been responsible for a huge percentage of the acts of genocide? YES!
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 03:50 AM

Religion is crap by definition - any empirical proof destroys faith.
REP: Where is the empirical proof that God does not exist as I had discussed.
======================================
Maybe man expects too much from a creator. We bestow impossible abilities on this entity and when our expectations aren't met, we reject the possibility of a creator.
REP:Creator as I wrote relates one's own consciousness.Impossible abilities are found in humans so why do you doubt on the God?
=================================
We no longer treat infections with bleeding ... we use antibiotics.
REP: I am not denying the existence of Science.
======================================
The explanation was purely sceintifc in its approach.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 04:10 AM

dvk: Asks:
"Where is the empirical proof that God does not exist as I had discussed."

I will provide it. If there is a god then whose definition of that god would you want used for the empirical proof? The god of the Orthodox, Conservative or Reform Jews? The god of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Luthern, Episcopalian, Mormon, Baptist, or Christian Scientist Christians?
Perhaps the god of Islam. Should we choose the Suni one? The Shiite one? Maybe the Alawite one?
Or perhaps we should be more respectful of the Hindu and Buddhist faiths and discuss not the one but the many. Or perhaps animists are correct and we should worship the sun, the moon, and the forests.

You tell me specifically WHICH god and I will provide you with the empirical proof.

dvk wrote: "Impossible abilities are found in humans"

This statement is utter and complete nonsense on its face. It demonstrates either an inability to think or an inability to write with clarity. An ability that exists can NOT be impossible.

And the fact that you with your limited intelligence, limited education, and limited understanding think something is impossible does not make it so. You don't understand Quantum Mechanics, neither does the pope, neither did the writers of any holy book of any religion. So is QM impossible? Quarks? Photons? Gluons? Glue Balls? I sure hope you don't vote.

I wrote:
"We no longer treat infections with bleeding ... we use antibiotics."
And dvk responded:
"REP: I am not denying the existence of Science."

Of course you aren't but then that's a red herring because I didn't say you were. My point which you conveniently ignored was that your god created penicillin but didn't bother in thousands of years to tell anyone while watching innocent young children die horrible painful deaths. Then, if you believe in Christianity, he sent his son to help mankind and that little troll either didn't bother to tell anyone about penicillin either. Why?

Anybody with half a brain in the middle ages knew to put moldy bread on an infection. But they didn't learn it from their holy books full of advice like "don't eat pork" and "don't eat shellfish." Why?

And that why can only be answered in one of three ways:
1. Your god didn't know penicillin existed.
2. Your god knew about penicillin and kept secret.
3. Your god doesn't exist.

You tell me ... which of these 3 you believe. It is, after all, your personal god.

Speaking for myself ... if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 04:26 AM

If there is a god then whose definition of that god would you want used for the empirical proof?
REP: Definition of GOD is independent of its practitioners.It like the Ultimate truth which Physics is trying to reach but fails to express itslef completely.And such a partial truth doesnt make it redundant or false.
==============================================
You tell me specifically WHICH god and I will provide you with the empirical proof.
REP:God who lives inside you.
===============================
dvk wrote: "Impossible abilities are found in humans"
This statement is utter and complete nonsense on its face. It demonstrates either an inability to think or an inability to write with clarity. An ability that exists can NOT be impossible.
REP: Impossible is an ability which can be accomplished by non-humans.May be God.And that is to create a Universe. We can create such a Universe in Principle therefore we can accomplish the impossible.
Happy??!!!
=======================================
And the fact that you with your limited intelligence, limited education, and limited understanding think something is impossible does not make it so.
REP:Isnt it true that with so many limitations I remain beyond known limitations?
========================================
You don't understand Quantum Mechanics, neither does the pope, neither did the writers of any holy book of any religion. So is QM impossible? Quarks? Photons? Gluons? Glue Balls? I sure hope you don't vote.
REP: What I dont understand tell me ? Physics ,Geography , Computers , Maths ,Arts, History , Politics ....The language you use may be different but I can epxress the same with no effort.
==================================
And dvk responded:
"REP: I am not denying the existence of Science."
Of course you aren't but then that's a red herring because I didn't say you were. My point which you conveniently ignored was that your god created penicillin but didn't bother in thousands of years to tell anyone while watching innocent young children die horrible painful deaths. Then, if you believe in Christianity, he sent his son to help mankind and that little troll either didn't bother to tell anyone about penicillin either. Why?
REP: Becuase he had no idea that he will ever need penicillin... He never imagined we will fight so madly. This is reason why he allowed it come into existence. He wants to maintain peace on earth.All the techonological developments are taking place in order to maintain peace.
=====================================
And that why can only be answered in one of three ways:
1. Your god didn't know penicillin existed.
2. Your god knew about penicillin and kept secret.
3. Your god doesn't exist.
REP: Answer I told you .It was beyond your one line answers.
========================================
Speaking for myself ... if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3.
REP: Are you a drug company mafia?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 06:05 AM

" Definition of GOD is independent of its practitioners.It like the Ultimate truth which Physics is trying to reach but fails to express itslef completely"

"God who lives inside you."

There are mutually exclusive statements. Are you confused? You're sure confusing me. I don't know what you believe, you waffle around more than GWBush.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 06:48 AM

Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/15/05 04:54 PM

dvk wrote:
"REP: Definition of GOD is independent of its practitioners."

Your willingness to advertise your complete and utter ignorance on this subject matter is the stuff of which legends are written. I can't respond to this statement as no rabbi, priest, imam, etc. would agree with you. Each religion assigns different interpretations and characteristics to its god.

dvk worte: "REP:God who lives inside you."

The only thing living inside of me is a tapeworm. And he assures me he didn't create the universe or anyone as ignorant as you.

dvk wrote:
"REP: Impossible is an ability which can be accomplished by non-humans."

Word have meaning ... try using a dictionary or learning English. Whichever is easiest for you.

dvk wrote:
"REP:Isnt it true that with so many limitations I remain beyond known limitations?"

Well beyond rational thinking of that we can be sure. I really do hope you are a child. So your chronological age will correspond with the sophistication of your brain.

dvk wrote:
"REP: Are you a drug company mafia?"

Are you 10 years old? You repeatedly demonstrate an inability to engage in critical thinking, an inability to comprehend simple concepts, and an inability to behave like an adult. Your answer to this question clearly indicates what you really believe in: Nothing.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/19/05 06:30 AM

I have given the answers elsewhere.

The God is independent of religion as it is the unlitmate truth which all religions are trying to achieve.
Each one of them have different point of view because they never cared to understand what the other religion is saying.
The situtaion is very much familiar to String theory followers.
Posted by: Sparky

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/19/05 01:55 PM

I don't think this board is a place for any inquiry into superior beings as most people here made up their minds long ago, and, like Uncle Al, have become highly proficient in name calling instead of analytical thinking.

That mankind has always found a need to understand his place and purpose in life can be argued as either cause or effect, does not negate its efficiency in making our lives more meaningful and more fulfilling. We have several dysfunction intellects on the website that due to a low emotional intelligence cannot relate with what religion means to you. They categorize it into a box of non-scientific and thereby strip humanity of it's emotional characteristics and virtues. The care and love we humans can have for our offspring is boiled down to a survivalist behavior built into our genes.

In fact, those with low EQ are often those raised by parents not adept at care and nurturing, and so they haven't experienced deep self-sacrificing love. Some here, Kevin comes to mind, have recovered from difficult childhoods, and discovered that side of human nature on their own. Religion and philosophy suggest answers to deeper questions about how we should live and die, than science, especially physical science, can ever answer.

And yet, in this here and now, we live in a wonderful world. We can appreciate it and learn much of how something so complex can be made from so few building blocks, and maybe make our world better. In the Old Testament, Jehovah (the self existing one as he called himself) told Moses he would make Moses a god unto Pharaoh. I.e. Moses would have god like powers in Pharaoh?s eyes.

I think we are indeed becoming like the gods, learning how to create and destroy life as never before. Learning and knowledge cannot be stopped (our scientist friends will continue to create and discard theories, getting ever closer to the truth), but our wisdom of how to use that truth and knowledge must keep pace so that we do not destroy ourselves. Knowledge and wisdom sometimes contend with each other, but they together define us as human beings.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/20/05 12:55 AM

A child wrote:
"The God is independent of religion"

And no doubt you can write down a description of that independent entity and get practitioners of Shinto in Japan to agree with you.

Are are their beliefs less important than yours?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/20/05 04:19 AM

Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/20/05 03:10 PM

Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/21/05 04:05 AM

I agree, in some sense, with what you just wrote. But it is a bit of a joke to mention Buddhists given that they would think your ability to count 'gods' rather challenged.
REP: I agree with you but this challenge appears because Buddha died and his followers are following what he told them when the time period and understanding was different.. this is the reason some say God comes again to explain what he meant by THAT and why we need to REWRITE some of it.
But this does not take away validity of some fundamental truths which are still admired by so many followers and non-followers.
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/21/05 06:32 PM

Some interesting stuff. I personally have never understod why there is conflict between those of science and those of a religious following. Usually it is the religious side that wants to inject itself into the lives of other people. To believe in science and its prospect for improving life is not an automatic denial of a belief in a religious concept.

The point here is that those of religious groups are agressors wanting to challenge every body in some weird confrontation that people of science want to leave alone or simply ignore. When not confronted with some zealous believer I have no trouble at all ignoring all religions even though there may be a church or a temple on every other corner and millions of people get tax deductions for the money spent to support their religion - every day and every year since before I was born. This favor is for the good work these religious groups do - for whom? - I think for their own parishoners or people they want to convert to their belief.

So dkv wants to find some "scientific" proof that God exists! This is not the place to find comfort for such searching. Find God in faith.

jim wood
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/22/05 03:34 AM

dvk: Ok not followers of Buddha ... just those of the Hindu faith. Or Shinto. Or any one of thousands of others that could be named. You avoided the point but not well enough to be left off the hook.

jjw004 wrote:
"I personally have never understod why there is conflict between those of science and those of a religious following"

Have you been living in a cave? Or do you expect someone else to expalin why you don't understand it. The conflict is as primary as the difference between fact and fiction, truth and lie, proof and fraud. How difficult is it?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/23/05 04:17 AM

dvk: Ok not followers of Buddha ... just those of the Hindu faith. Or Shinto. Or any one of thousands of others that could be named. You avoided the point but not well enough to be left off the hook.
Morgan,
All religions including the Hindu Faith need to revist their own base religions interpretations.
Although so many follow there are only few who resonate with the Godhood.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/23/05 04:50 AM

dvk wrote:
"All religions including the Hindu Faith need to revist their own base religions interpretations."

Directly conflicting your original statement when I asked you to define specifically which god you wanted me to systematically disprove. Too bad your memory is too bad to remember back just a few posts to your previous inability to give a straight answer to a simple question.

BTW: Godhood? Is that like motherhood or hoodlum?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 09/23/05 05:45 AM

I asked you to define specifically which god you wanted me to systematically disprove.
REP: God is understood by you to be known.No one can prove or disprove it you.
Once you know by following or creating then only you can question it. It is as subjective as that.
If you want to disprove , Disprove the following :
God is everything.

While doing so remember that contradiction is not a criteria to prove or disprove.
The only criteria of acceptable reasoning is
"Ability to influence the reality."
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/05/05 10:27 PM

quote..

And that why can only be answered in one of three ways:
1. Your god didn't know penicillin existed.
2. Your god knew about penicillin and kept secret.
3. Your god doesn't exist.

You tell me ... which of these 3 you believe. It is, after all, your personal god.

Speaking for myself ... if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3.


------------------------------------

I have heard this kind of arguement before. What kind of god allows suffering? Well is may be that children dying from penicillin treatable illnesses is a direct consequence of 'The Fall' and is part of a universe that God did not want, but humankind chose. C.S. Lewis wrote 'Suffering is God's bugle horn to an otherwise deaf world'.

And although in this case God may not be involved at a Macro level - who can say whether God is involved at a micro level - in the lives of the individual dying - preparing them for something else or talking to them when they are most willing to listen. Who knows what pacts are made just before closing time.

And yes of course, if you do not believe in anything other that life as an uncreated series of chemical reactions with a very final end, then suffering is nothing more than pointless and meaningless. But if life is about choosing and a preparation for a more permanent experience of existence, then suffering can lose some of it's indignity and horror - and will be seen in the end to be only a drop in an ocean of experiences.

There are more options that the three you posited. Do you want a creator to end all suffering? Then that creator must also stop humankind from doing almost everything, and keep people in a moral straight-jacket that would be suffocating, because most of what we do causes someone or other pain. Ever been selfish, unfaithful, told an untruth, became angry, insulted anyone and made them feel small, or even lived in a society that consumes more than it needs whilst children die in some parts of the world for want of cheap oral rehydration therapy?

I think on the whole we need to look closer to home to find out why most suffering is not alleviated, instead of blaming God.

Sorry for this post, I know this is not the site for it, but it won't do to let points such as this go unanswered.

Regards,

Blacknad.

I expect most people to now give me a one star rating smile
Posted by: Dogrock

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/06/05 12:48 AM

It's the scientists who explained that the earth was not flat. And they've never stopped informing us of the world we live in, or of inventing things to solve the problems we face. I could thank god for making the scientists to dripple out secondhand knowledge. But then their efforts and mine would be so meaningless, that I doubt if any of us would bother discussing god.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/06/05 09:20 PM

Blacknad

Of course you've heard that argument before. And you'll hear it again as it is valid.

If "God" created everything that is not everything good ... that is EVERY thing. Thus the malicious little troll must accept full credit/blame for every creation that is not man-made (at a minimum).

So who created the polio virus?
So who created the AIDS virus?
Want to take a whack at childhood leukemia?

Oh heck make it easy on yourself. How about why males have nipples?

So which is it? Ignorance? Malice? Or Option 3?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/07/05 02:53 AM

DA,

Well I presume that male nipples are a by-product of the evolutionary process - seems straightforward enough.
But if that were not the case - I know of guys who like having them played with or sucked (not by me of course smile ) So I suppose that if one did not accept evolution, it is not beyond the boundary of belief to think that male nipples were created as a sensual device, purely there for enjoyment. But I plump for the evolutionary vestige, especially as I find mine get a little sensitive and uncomfortable if anyone tries to play with them - hardly a pleasure device for me.

As for the existence of the AIDS virus, well this is more difficult.

I believe it is a direct consequence of the fall.

When we chose to go our own way, there was a severe consequence - we put emnity between ourselves and the natural world.

"Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.
It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field."

It seems to me that like the laws of physics, there is a universal moral law. The ACTION was to choose a path contrary to God's advice, the REACTION was a complete breakdown in the relationship between humankind and this planet.

A breakdown that has reverberated throughout history and includes polio, and dying children and may culminate in us making this planet unfit for human life.
For me it goes some way to explaining why we as a species (evolved on this planet and presumably by all reasonable thinking, should be suited to it and able to co-exist within it) have such a destructive relationship with nature, including stripping it of forests at an outrageous rate, being implicated in the extinction of other species, and probably contributing to climate change that may prove fatal for us, and yet again for other species.

So for me, there are still more choices than the three you offered - I choose:

4. He has chosen to bear the cost of creating (by whatever method), sentient beings that have chosen to ignore him and do things their own way and making a right royal mess of his creation (that at one point he proclaimed as 'good'), whilst at the same time denying his existence because they cannot believe in a being that would create such a world.

I am talking about the grand scheme of things here and I am not belittling your or any other scientist's achievements in helping us to understand this world and undoing some of the damage done by the choices I believe we have made.

DA - I know that none of these answers will seem like anything other than nonsense to you, but I am sure you will forgive me for stating a sincerely held view - even if you do think it is madness.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/07/05 07:19 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"As for the existence of the AIDS virus, well this is more difficult.

I believe it is a direct consequence of the fall."

Oh come on know Blacknad. What fall? Surely not a fall that occurred outside of God's realm. Certainly not one that took place with his knowledge. Certainly not one that occurred without acquiescence?

The free-will argument has been made before but it fails to stand up to even the smallest attempt to debunk it.

Who created Adam?
Who created Eve?
Who created the garden?
Who created everything in the garden?
Who created the ability to have free will?
Who set the golden trap KNOWING IN ADVANCE the outcome?

Or is your malicious little troll to stupid to understand the consequences of its own actions?

Once again you can't have it both ways. You can not hypocritically say ... I created all of the conditions, set everything in motion, knew the inevitable outcome, but had nothing to do with it.

That excuse may seem acceptable to teenage boys trying to explain to a girl's father how she got pregnant. But I doubt the father would buy it and neither should any rational adult. The "it just happened" defense is for children age 2-4.

Want to try again?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/08/05 02:30 AM

Oh come on know Blacknad. What fall?
1. Surely not a fall that occurred outside of God's realm.
2. Certainly not one that took place with his knowledge.
3. Certainly not one that occurred without acquiescence?

Dan,

1. Accepted.
2. The fall took place with God's knowledge - yes.
3. I do not believe that God acquiesced, as in 'consent or comply passively or without protest'. He certainly gave warning and certainly protested - but I am not sure that this is what you meant. What follows in your post is the real question.

The idea, simply put, that God would go on to create a race of sentient, free-willed creatures despite knowing all that would ensue, including uncountable instances of the most outrageous suffering and the fact that the majority of those created would reject him and end up existing separately from him.

I can see why you would think this is sheer nonsense and why you would feel that the fact that anyone who holds this view defies any logical explanation.

And I can see the relationship this statement implies -

God created beings that would reject him + this would lead to immense suffering = God created immense suffering.


I am sure that if I was an entity considering creating such a creature I would think 'well... on balance, I think I'll give it a miss'.


But I believe that God did not come to that conclusion. I believe that God considered everything and decided to go ahead and create.

And I do not know what the 'everything' was, that God took into consideration when deciding that on balance it was better to create that not to.

Obviously the question still remains - How can a being be described as good when he has directly created a situation where suffering and evil actions come into being?

Well who defines what is good or bad? Is it us or is it God? Is it us with our limited understanding of the 'everything' that God took into consideration?
Can we honestly and conclusively say that God is bad or a ?malicious little troll? for weighing up the options and deciding that on balance it was better to act than not to? Better to create creatures and give them the incredible opportunity to experience existence - to love and create and explore and discover and experience the incredible privilege of giving birth to life themselves? - And in doing so he has done no evil directly.

Your argument, it seems, would argue any God into inaction, and yet we human beings create children every day that may go on to perpetrate incredible evils and visit horrific suffering upon others or suffer, themselves, from painful and lingering deaths. At the least they will go on to hurt someone at some point in their lives ? who doesn?t. Are you saying that we should give up procreation?

You will still probably feel that I have not answered the central question - How can a good god give birth to a situation that will allow or even enforce evil. Well I feel that the question rests upon assumptions about the nature of evil and has within it a self derived belief that says the act of creating a situation that will bring about both incredible good alongside incredible evil is in itself an evil act. We are indeed deep in the land of metaphysics and may find that at this point our very thought processes & language are too narrow to be able to grasp the extent of variables involved in deciding whether a god is guilty or innocent.

I would need much more time and space to do this subject any great service, but I am conscious that this forum is a science forum, not religion and philosophy, and I am sure this debate is intruding upon the real business here.


I still believe there are more options to define a God that chooses to create under these circumstances than the three you posited. Religious matters cannot be that black and white. They are not subject to Occam's razor and sometimes you find the answer by going the long way round.
I understand why people who have shaped and disciplined their minds to excel in the area of science will often find religious debate nonsensical, for you are surely not as happy to trade in the suppositions, conjecture and the intangible ghosts of theology, but would much rather deal with concrete falsifiable facts.

I still choose option four.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/08/05 06:35 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"I do not believe that God acquiesced, as in 'consent or comply passively or without protest'. He certainly gave warning and certainly protested...."

So your God is so powerful he can create the entire universe. So knowledgeable he could set up every physical constant and design DNA and the gluons that hold together quarks. But yet you wish us to believe that either (A) His protests so weak as to be ignored or (B) Capable of flooding the entire planet but incapable of stopping one human from eating an apple. Heck my mother could stop someone from eating an apple and she's well over 80. Please apply some of the material between your ears to responding to questions.

Blacknad further wrote:
"The idea, simply put, that God would go on to create a race of sentient, free-willed creatures despite knowing all that would ensue,...."

And you see an entity that knowing in advance that he was setting up the conditions for the Holocaust, the Turkish genocide, and Inquisition, etc. and let it happen as an all loving father? Please explain this one.

Let me remind you that this is the same god that had children torn apart by bears for insulting an old man. Yet does nothing to stop genocide, torture, and rape? An explanation is required.

And Blacknad further wrote:
"But I believe that God did not come to that conclusion."

And on what basis have you determined this? How can an omniscient entity, all knowing, not come to a conclusion? That is a logical impossibility.

Blacknad further wrote:
"I still believe there are more options to define a God that chooses to create under these circumstances than the three you posited."

If you believe in the malicious little troll then you believe it gave you a brain: Use it. Come up with a fourth possibility.

I'll state my three again.

1. I created everything thus I know it exists and choose not to tell you.
2. I created everything but I don't know it exists.
3. I don't exist.

This time please apply critical thinking before responding. Your response this time does more to undermine your position than to support it.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/09/05 09:53 PM

DA Morgan ?
Let me remind you that this is the same god that had children torn apart by bears for insulting an old man. Yet does nothing to stop genocide, torture, and rape? An explanation is required.

REP: This is the story of the prophet Elisha calling down a curse upon some ?children?, forty-two of whom who were subsequently mauled by two she-bears. (The bears, Ursus Syriacus inhabited Palestine at the time). It is comfortably assumed that the passage is making the point that God sent the bears out, and that this was not just some bizarre coincidence.
In this instance it seems that God may not have torn children apart. The words used to describe the ?children?, (sometimes translated ?youths?), is translated from the Hebrew term ?neurim qetannim? which can best be understood in relation to how it is used elsewhere in the bible.

1. It was used to describe Isaac when he was in his twenties.
2. It was used to describe Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen.
3. It was used to describe soldiers in 1 Kings 20:14-15, who were up to the age of thirty.

The passage in 2 Kings 2:23-25 says forty-two males were mauled by two bears - it does not say whether there were any more present, but it is possible as it is likely that many ran away and escaped a mauling as the bears ravaged their way through the crowd.

So we have a crowd of over forty-two males, up to 30 years old, taunting a lone traveller who after performing a mercy mission in nearby Jericho was making his way through an area possibly very hostile to him as it was a centre of Baal worship. A religion that practiced child sacrifice, amongst other barbaric acts and was probably not entirely enamoured of the followers of Jehovah.

Now in my reading of the situation, Elisha was facing an angry mob and was possibly in serious danger.

There is also no way of knowing if the forty-two were actually killed, because the Hebrew word translated as mauled may easily indicate less serious injuries.


So ?the same god that had children torn apart by bears for insulting an old man? is not an apt way to pr?cis this passage, and just as it is essential in scientific research to gather all of the facts, so it is here also.

DA Morgan ?
?does nothing to stop genocide, torture, and rape?

REP: I refer you to the post - 05-10-2005 18:27October 05, where I stated:

Do you want a creator to end all suffering? Then that creator must also stop humankind from doing almost everything, and keep people in a moral straight-jacket that would be suffocating, because most of what we do causes someone or other pain. Ever been selfish, unfaithful, told an untruth, became angry, insulted anyone and made them feel small, or even lived in a society that consumes more than it needs whilst children die in some parts of the world for want of cheap oral rehydration therapy?

- God did not create mindless robots that unquestioningly obey his every command. The human race may go on to create robots with A.I. (complete with the three laws), but I am not sure that, like our children, they will ever love us or actually have a choice about whether they want to know us or not. I believe that we are free to rape and pillage and stick two fingers up to creation as well as each other because God did want to give us that choice. But also remember that we are free to love each other and to enjoy beauty, art, the world, relationships, debate, sex, exploration and of course science.

I think that if humanity voted whether it wanted to exist or not, despite everything - the ayes would have it. So whilst some are so unhappy with existence that they would want to kick a creator in the teeth, most people, including me, are grateful to be alive.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/09/05 09:59 PM

DA Morgan -
And Blacknad further wrote:
"But I believe that God did not come to that conclusion."

And on what basis have you determined this? How can an omniscient entity, all knowing, not come to a conclusion? That is a logical impossibility.

REP: Yes that would be a logical impossibility. However, I did not say that God failed to come to a conclusion. I stated -

?But I believe that God did not come to THAT conclusion. I believe that God considered everything and decided to go ahead and create.?

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/09/05 10:59 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"Do you want a creator to end all suffering?"

Is that request unreasonable? Is it moral for a man and woman to give birth to a child and then leave it to starve to death? Is it moral for people to let horse die of an infection when they could get a vet to give it an antibiotic? Do you hold the one you worship to a lower standard?

Please don't write a damned dissertation. A simple yes or no will suffice.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/09/05 11:03 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"?But I believe that God did not come to THAT conclusion. I believe that God considered everything and decided to go ahead and create.?"

So your all-knowing, all-powerful, malicious little genocidal troll knowing he was creating the single most wicked and horrible situation in the entire universe carefully reviewed the facts and was too damned much of a moron to come up with anything better. Amazing.

Giraffes seem to get along just fine without genocide. So do mountain gorillas. So does the grass growing on my lawn. You actually want us to belive that after creating millions of species that don't commit torture and murder he then created one that did and said "What the heck ... this should be fun to watch ... sort of like the World Wrestling Federation ... but the blood will be real.

I am impressed. Do you worship the memory of Josef Mengele too?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/11/05 07:55 PM

Dan,

Elsewhere I have accused you of bluster - and it was based upon your last few posts here.

I don't mean it maliciously, but it seems obvious that you are very irritated by having to talk to stupid religious people.

I have answers, and good answers, but they need time to explain. I cannot debate in yes and no terms as you request. The issues are much more complex than that.

So I shall bow out of this particular discussion.

But I have enjoyed debating with you, even if you do think I am a sad, unthinking muppet.

And you have certainly made me examine what I believe a little closer.

I just hope there are no hard feelings, because we are fellow travellers through life - even if we do have differing understanding of what that life is about.


I can't sum it up as well as Amaranth:

'Survivors of the crucible, these afrighted children,
Need some gentle gathering-in to lead them
Into some sheltered lee to bring them
Close enough to normalcy to realize
Some sense of kinship with the rest;
Close enough to realize all are one species;
That, "We are all of one blood, thou and I."
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/11/05 11:35 PM

Can't resist - I've just realised that you got forty points on the crackpot index for the following statement:

I am impressed. Do you worship the memory of Josef Mengele too?

Crackpot Index

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/12/05 02:52 AM

Blacknad wrote:
"I don't mean it maliciously, but it seems obvious that you are very irritated by having to talk to stupid religious people."

Irritated no. If I was irritated I would ignore you.

I find you dangerous. I find all sentient beings incapable of applying logic to sensory inputs dangerous.

You folks have been the root cause of too much genocide, too much murder, too much torture. And rarely even an apology much less a willing acceptance of punishment fitting the crime.

I can forgive a unviverse that unhypocritically causes and accepts suffering. I give no quarter to those that observe the suffering, shrug their shoulders, and call it 'gods will'.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/12/05 08:51 PM

Just to clarify, because I am weak willed and find I must answer you because you misrepresent me.

I am embarrased by Christianity's actions when they conflict with it's founders commands.

Anything that has been done that conflicts with the following statements is undefendable:

Love one another.

Turn the other cheek.

Love your enemies.

There is not one word of Christ's that justifies violence, or even the disgraceful persecution of gays, or the equally disgusting racism that you might encounter in the Bible belt. Any Christian that kills or maims a Doctor who performs abortion is beyond contempt - (it has happened). The same for genocide (Rwanda).

The same is true of the inquisition, the witch trials, and the crusades.

I am equally embarassed that the Catholic pronouncements on contraception have led to many deaths from Aids.

The church should never hold such power - power is a corrupting force.

Christ asked us to lay down power and take up love - he urged nothing but serving others - all others, not just the ones you agree with or like.

It should not be forgotten that many people 'play' at religion, there are fewer real Christians than you could imagine.

"Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

And I am intimately familiar with suffering, and know better than to shrug my shoulders and say it is 'God's Will'. The issue is far more complex than that.

Do not demolish straw men.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Mike Kremer

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/12/05 10:21 PM

I am a person that does not believe in God, and yet I respect all religions and their beliefs.
I find Blacknad lacking in his respect for the new 'science of truth'. He cannot even integrate those confirmed historical truths of the Bible, with archeological scientific discoverys.
In fact he dos'nt even try, for which I might give him some credit if he did. But rather prefers to talk about God as though he/it was a realistic person.
He does'nt even mention one of the first intelligent scientists that walked upon this world, Moses.
Who, went up the mountain to carve out the Ten commandments on stone, in peace, solitude, and thoughtfulness.
Of course we all know that God didnt write them, since Moses broke them in his anger upon seeing his 'flock' dancing around a golden calf. He went right back up the mountain and recarved the Ten Commandments a second time.
Ahhh would'nt life be wonderful if we all lived by the ten commandments alone. Without all the extras of non existant Gods, hate, love and hypocrasy,...added by man.
Thank goodness I generally follow the Jewish religion, one of the very few religions that does not require you to believe in God.
A religion that is more akin to Buddism than anything else, (since Buddism arose out of Judaism)
Both ways of life, I find, give all those who follow those paths, a lasting psychological and mental contentment, plus completness.
Which is what everyones life should be about.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/13/05 02:56 AM

Well said, Mike! Just wish Shasta were reading this. He chose to name Buddhism as his religion when he had his Eagle Scout board of review. It got him through the review board; he's now an Eagle Scout.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/13/05 06:05 AM

I have heard this kind of arguement before. What kind of god allows suffering? Well is may be that children dying from penicillin treatable illnesses is a direct consequence of 'The Fall' and is part of a universe that God did not want, but humankind chose. C.S. Lewis wrote 'Suffering is God's bugle horn to an otherwise deaf world'.
REP: Wish to share some Philosophy here..God is not seperate from you.... it is you and at no point infact you are away from him...you need to know this ..Knowning that he is you is not sufficient ... living like God is required. Thus knowledge is God. Know whatever you can know till you know me. we are moving up ... keep it up.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/13/05 08:00 PM

Mike Kremmer:

'prefers to talk about God as though he/it was a realistic person'

REP: I talk about God as he is portrayed in the Bible, along with 99% of the 2.1 billion Christians in the world.


'cannot even integrate those confirmed historical truths of the Bible, with archeological scientific discoverys.'

REP: Can you give me some examples of where I haven't?


'Of course we all know that God didn?t write them, since Moses broke them in his anger upon seeing his 'flock' dancing around a golden calf.'

REP: I cannot follow the connection here:

We all know God didn?t write them,
since Moses broke them in his anger..

Moses? breaking of the tablets symbolised the broken relationship between the Israelites and God, because of their actions. His breaking them does not have any bearing on whether God wrote them.


Ahhh would'nt life be wonderful if we all lived by the ten commandments alone.

REP: Yes, especially as the first one is ?You shall have no other god?s before me?.


?I generally follow the Jewish religion, one of the very few religions that does not require you to believe in God.?

REP: Any religion that does not require you to believe in a God is a ?system of philosophy?, and should dispense of most of its tradition. If you want to believe in a religion that does not require a belief in God, why not just forget the whole thing and concentrate on formulating a system for living and defining morality that is purely based upon human reasoning, instead of tradition and myth.


What are the core beliefs of this Jewish/Buddhist religion? I would be interested to hear it from you ? although I have a good idea.


Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/14/05 12:18 AM

dvk wrote:
"God is not seperate from you.... it is you"

When you wake up please phone. This is:

(A) complete and total nonsense unsupported by any biblical text.

(B) a woo-woo feel-good fabrication offering appearance without substance.

I did not create the universe.
I did not invent every disease on this planet.
I do not brain wash children by threat of murder, rape, and eternal torture.

If you do then turn yourself in to the local police authority in your area.

If I had done so I'd save the police the trouble and have committed suicide long ago. Perhaps god did. Perhaps GOD IS DEAD by his own hand. It would certainly be the first decent thing he ever did.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/14/05 12:20 AM

Blacknad wrote:
" I talk about God as he is portrayed in the Bible, along with 99% of the 2.1 billion Christians in the world."

Thank goodness for Prozac and Thorazine. Perhaps they should be distributed more widely.

What you just wrote, to me, is an admission of psychosis: Nothing less.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/15/05 06:05 AM

Forgive if I said anything wrong.
I was giving you the Full Will Power and you were not willing to take because you dont happen to see this happening all around you.
Come on you are Scientist you know that Relative Motion is Not True.All relative terms have no meaning. In short the There is nothing called as Will Power and No Will Power. All which is there is Knowledge. Thats all. See the complete Picture and you will not feel so handicapped.
If you cant see it then Practice Science Seriously or Practice MEditation Seriously or Live your own Life Seriously(without Medicines)
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/15/05 04:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Perhaps god did.
The latest USAToday/CNN/Gallup Poll says that the majority of Americans, 53 percent, claim that God created human beings in their present form exactly as described in the Bible.

A scant 12 percent believe that human beings evolved without an assist from God.

The remaining 35 percent chose the middle ground, giving God a supporting role in an evolutionary process that's gone on for millions of years.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2005-10-10-evolution-debate-centerpiece_x.htm

Will the majority rule in a democracy?

Garry 'Jesus Freak' Denke
http://www.garrydenke.com
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/15/05 05:13 PM

Garry Denke wrote:
"... majority of Americans, 53 percent, claim that God created human beings in their present form exactly as described in the Bible."

They also reelected George W. Bush. Hardly a ringing endorsement of their ability to use their brains for something more important than watching TV.

A poll of citizens of all other countries will clearly show that most citizens of this planet are not that impressed with GWB either.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/15/05 06:10 PM

Would never have voted someone like Bush in if I lived in USA - his behaviour is disgraceful. I also think it helps if the Pesident of the only power in the world is intelligent.

I accept the theory of evolution.

I do not watch TV, have no receiver, and get my info from books and the net.

Maybe we should rename this site to 'Christian-go-go'.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/16/05 12:00 AM

Blacknad suggests:
"Maybe we should rename this site to 'Christian-go-go'."

I doubt that would make much of a difference. Kate has run this site for many years with minimal interest in anything that goes on here other than to study her volunteer lab rats. This leads to the site attracting the most diverse, if meaningless, content. Content that occassionally rises to the level of entertainment. Thus my participation.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/16/05 12:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Content that occassionally rises to the level of entertainment.
Thus my participation.
382 members pounding the feedbar at SAGG,
with top entertainment being provided by...

http://www.scienceagogo.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?/ubb/directory.html

1. DA Morgan - 468 posts
2. dkv - 358 posts
3. Amaranth Rose - 303 posts
4. TheFallibleFiend - 230 posts
5. extrasense - 206 posts


http://www.scienceagogo.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=directory;d=browse;sorder=2

Occassionally?

Garry 'Jesus Freak' Denke
http://www.denocoinc.com
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/16/05 01:31 AM

This forum is what you make it. When scientific interest posts are ignored, and questionable expressions of faith or mysticism are thoroughly vetted, the forum evolves in that direction. I have posted many items I thought interesting only to have them ignored completely. You don't have to answer posts that don't relate to science. The fact that many here do indicates the realm of interest of the audience. If you don't want trolls, don't feed them. Two come to mind readily; if you keep feeding them they keep coming back for more. Keep to Science; quit feeding the trolls.

Peace and Health,

"Amaranth"
Posted by:

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 03:50 AM

Trolls. I like this. Amaranth, I believe in this forum as an information exchange matrix. I have never been involved with any other forum; and do not know the protocols of them. What I have enjoyed about scienceagogo is that there are many different (sometimes opposing, sometimes vitriol) viewpoints regarding a topic. This, for me, is exciting because I have encountered much thoughtfulness (some less regardful). I myself have learned, in the past few months, to (try to) clarify what I am attempting to convey. I have encountered some feedback ranging from insulting to provocative and thoughtful.
A problem with a forum is that obviously that the subtle nonverbal cues are absent. It is difficult to discern the tone of a post. As such, I find it helpful to try to understand a post as it is written; and to not make assumptions.
I weep for I have not found scienceagogo years ago wink I really wish I had. I graduated high school, dropped out of college twice.. work in a distribution warehouse.. I have no formal science education from an institution of higher learning. But I am (almost) addictively drawn to this site because I know that the people partaking here enjoy discovery; this I share.
Science, to me, is about discovery..learning from others..challenging exisiting ideas..being open-minded (not so much that the brain oozes out)..
If I can genuinely learn something here or help to add insight regarding a scientific query.. then that is all I need.
I really enjoy this place.

Sincerely,
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 04:51 AM

Wonderful Words Mung.. You see capability to learn is almost always equivalent to What needs to be learnt in this Fuzzy World...This is the beginging of Grand Unification of Science,Arts and Religion.
Your words are worth repeating again:
"I weep for I have not found scienceagogo years ago I really wish I had. I graduated high school, dropped out of college twice.. work in a distribution warehouse.. I have no formal science education from an institution of higher learning. But I am (almost) addictively drawn to this site because I know that the people partaking here enjoy discovery; this I share.
"
Finally the problem:
"A problem with a forum is that obviously that the subtle nonverbal cues are absent. It is difficult to discern the tone of a post. As such, I find it helpful to try to understand a post as it is written; and to not make assumptions. "- Thats the beauty of it .. it forces you to think ... it is the benchmark of critical Thinker.
Feel free to ask anything.. even if it is very trivial. I will to answer if it goes with my thread .. as I limited time to read and reply.

Wish you all the best in your search.
Posted by:

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 04:57 AM

Thank you DKV smile

Sincerely,
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 02:14 PM

Garry, you're looking at raw numbers. Posting the raw data is a good first step. But what about rate? There are people who have been here a year or more and hardly posted once a day and others who have been here a few short months and have already ended up on the short list of most voluminous posters.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 06:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheFallibleFiend:
But what about rate?
I rated the Top Five "Science a GoGo" Posters:

1. DA Morgan - 470 posts
2. dkv - 362 posts
3. Amaranth Rose - 328 posts
4. TheFallibleFiend - 234 posts
5. extrasense - 206 posts

http://www.scienceagogo.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?/ubb/directory.html

Five (5) Stars (*****)

The "Member Rated:" System (quite scientific) I used was based on the raw data rate.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/17/05 07:19 PM

I meant rate of posting, not rating of the poster. For example, say someone has been in the forum for a year and has posted 350 posts, roughly one a day. Another person has been on the forum for about a month and posted a scant 300 posts, or roughly 30 a day.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/18/05 04:12 AM

I meant rate of posting, not rating of the poster.
REP: Brilliant!!
For example, say someone has been in the forum for a year and has posted 350 posts, roughly one a day. Another person has been on the forum for about a month and posted a scant 300 posts, or roughly 30 a day.
REP:Rate of Posting Doesnt Serve the Purpose of having a Discussion. Rate of Posting Doesnt tell you anything about Terms like "Intelligence", "Coherence" etc.
===================================
We can take this discussion to my thread ... I guess I found some logical followers.
Posted by: Chris Maxwell

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/19/05 10:39 PM

without christianity particlely we would be still worshiping the sun- god , the world a savage place i'm greatful for religion particlely Christianity. So in fact i was Christianity that provided logic for our savage minds . and science.

so you need a balance of both . to find the answer.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/19/05 11:48 PM

"without christianity particlely we would be still worshiping the sun- god , the world a savage place i'm greatful for religion particlely Christianity. So in fact i was Christianity that provided logic for our savage minds . and science."

Nonsense. The ancient Greeks had discovered the basics of logic long before christianity existed - and when we emerged from the dark ages - after having been hijacked by christianity - the subject had not advanced in the interim.

It wasn't until George Boole tried to formulate logic in an algebra that we again began to make progress on that front. (BTW, while Boole provided the impetus and the essential thinking, the "Boolean Algegra" we use today is not the same algebra that he developed.)
Posted by: Chris Maxwell

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/20/05 03:30 PM

really?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/20/05 10:12 PM

Chris Maxwell wrote:
"without christianity particlely we would be still worshiping the sun- god , the world a savage place"

Somehow Chris managed to miss the fact that Christians, most often operating under the banner of Christianity, have been responsible for more murder, torture, and rape than all of other religions that have ever existed combined: Including atheists and animists.

How did you do that Chris? Inability to read or inability to do math?

Or is this the point where you declare that those that believe in what you believe in are "true" Christians and that all of the other people going to church are believers of the wrong form of Christianity.

Jesus Christ had a really bad weekend.

People with cancer often suffer far worse and do so for years.

Jesus Christ cured a few pathetic individuals.

Dr. Salk cured millions.

As a Christian you've nothing to say of interest unless it is an apology for the appalling inhumanity and hypocrisy of your bretheren.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/21/05 04:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:

Jesus Christ had a really bad weekend.

People with cancer often suffer far worse and do so for years.

Jesus Christ cured a few pathetic individuals.

Dr. Salk cured millions.
"RISKS, I like to say, always pay off.
You learn what to do or what not to do."

Jonas Salk, M.D.
Developer, Polio Vaccine
born 10/28/1914, died 6/23/1995

http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/sal0bio-1
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/21/05 04:46 PM

dvk copied/wrote:
"Jesus Christ had a really bad weekend.
People with cancer often suffer far worse and do so for years.
REP: Listen to tell you the truth ... you cancer you are seeing outside is inside you as well.
Sometimes you sound as fanatic as a fanatic religious leader."

Do you have a point here? If so I'd suggest trying to retrieve it. Me fanatic? Hardly. I just have a visceral dislike of hypocrites and liars. You, on the other hand seem to embrace them.

The entire suffering of your "lord" was measured in hours. Get off your keister and spend 40 days inside the Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center as I have done. You'll see the people who are really suffering ... but they are suffering for the sins of the one you worship as "good" and "kind" and other hypocritical nonsense.

dvk further copied/wrote:
"Jesus Christ cured a few pathetic individuals.
REP: He cured the entire Humanity"

I apologize you are absolutel correct. Cured them in the torture of the Inquisition. Cured them in the gas chamber and ovens of Nazi Germany. Cured them in the World Trade Center too no doubt. Thank you for saving us from your creations. I feel so much better now.

And finally dvk in a complete loss of contact from reality copied/wrote:
"Dr. Salk cured millions.
REP: Dr. Salk should cure AIDS"

Why is it his responsibility? My mother taught me to clean my own room and make my own bed? Isn't your invisible purple rhinoceros capable of admitting a mistake and cleaning up after himself?
He created AIDS ... let him get off his sorry bottom and uncreate it.

Again three choices:
1. He created AIDS with malice and aforethought but is incapable of making it go away.
2. He created AIDS with malice and aforethought and chooses not to make it go away.
3. He doesn't exist.

Try demonstrating a little integrity and making your choice from the three proposals, or, if you have enough matter in your frontal-lobes propose a fourth possibility.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 04:08 AM

dvk copied/wrote:
"Jesus Christ had a really bad weekend.
People with cancer often suffer far worse and do so for years.
REP: Listen to tell you the truth ... you cancer you are seeing outside is inside you as well.
Sometimes you sound as fanatic as a fanatic religious leader."
Do you have a point here? If so I'd suggest trying to retrieve it. Me fanatic? Hardly. I just have a visceral dislike of hypocrites and liars. You, on the other hand seem to embrace them.
REP: I DO NOT EMBRACE LIARS IF I AM SURE THAT HE OR SHE IS LYING. I KNOW THAT WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IS CORRECT BUT NOT FULLY CORRECT.
AS against this you say that They are ABSOLUTELY Wrong. You are denying any credit to the Religion for bringing up such a large family.
Currently Science fails to give a reason for a grand get together where all the distinctions stand void.All classes appear equal.All disticntions of geography and language disolve.
Today some religions are trying to build an all inclusive Branch of thought where religion and science exist together.Maharishi Mahesh Yogi my great inspirer has performed this task brilliantly. Christians and Muslims have also done amazing work in this Area within the defintion of their religion.But there is always scope of improvement all of them failed to give a logical explantion for this Universe.I gave you free of cost ;-)) rest i leave to your imagination.
=============================================
The entire suffering of your "lord" was measured in hours. Get off your keister and spend 40 days inside the Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center as I have done. You'll see the people who are really suffering ... but they are suffering for the sins of the one you worship as "good" and "kind" and other hypocritical nonsense.
REP: So many times I have been angry with you.But we still discuss. You know why I reacted that way. So all the suffering is just a manifestation of a reason embedded in your past.Nature is Transactional unless you really find someone who can take stand up and take responsibility of your past... thats what christ did. Thats what Krishna did for Arjun ...
Do you know that any true God also goes through suffering? He goes through it for different reasons .. his suffering is guided by a supreme Goal.Therefore in short if you want to end your suffering surrender to some God sincerely...Without any ifs and buts.Become one with him. Let him speak thru you and you will never suffer and infact you will always keep a smile..I know I am asking too much but thats the only way to save yourself form Transactional Nature.I glad that you care for others.. that shows that there is a God inside you .. he is alive .. and refuses to acknowledge any other God due to lack of Knwoledge ...
Whether you believe him or not you will go to heaven if you have done some good job which fits his list of itmes.. thats his promise .. but remember when you say there is no God there are people who will not be as good as you.Dont spoil them ... thats a crime in the eyes of Divine because it takes away the Harmony.
======================================
dvk further copied/wrote:
"Jesus Christ cured a few pathetic individuals.
REP: He cured the entire Humanity"
I apologize you are absolutel correct. Cured them in the torture of the Inquisition. Cured them in the gas chamber and ovens of Nazi Germany. Cured them in the World Trade Center too no doubt. Thank you for saving us from your creations. I feel so much better now.
REP: You are insisting that his creation is flawed becuase there is an existence of Pain...
I ask you simple scientific Question ... will you abstain form Happiness? If yes you will never suffer a pain.If no you will always find a pain. Happiness and Pain belong together as a group in the Quantum Gravitation Field and it is only a matter of time when one of them will appear... No one remains in Hell or Heaven forever.
======================================
And finally dvk in a complete loss of contact from reality copied/wrote:
"Dr. Salk cured millions.
REP: Dr. Salk should cure AIDS"
Why is it his responsibility? My mother taught me to clean my own room and make my own bed? Isn't your invisible purple rhinoceros capable of admitting a mistake and cleaning up after himself?He created AIDS ... let him get off his sorry bottom and uncreate it.
REP: Was that a joke to laugh at .. Any disease simply states his displeasure about something in us. He is unhappy that we are so ignorant of Universal truths.Let me tell you one more thing Truth is not only stated but also felt.More and more people are stating it without knowing how it feels.
=====================================
Again three choices:
1. He created AIDS with malice and aforethought but is incapable of making it go away.
2. He created AIDS with malice and aforethought and chooses not to make it go away.
3. He doesn't exist.
REP: I exist.. this was not part of your choice but it is true.AIDS or any other disease is a manifestation of your deisres of getting Happiness or Unhappiness.In the history of your actions lies the reason why it transfered from Monkey to Humans.You may not be directly responsible but you share the crime as you share benefits taken out commiting such a crime.
Why do you Torture Monkeys? It is a serious question theink about it.
========================================
Try demonstrating a little integrity and making your choice from the three proposals, or, if you have enough matter in your frontal-lobes propose a fourth possibility.
REP: Dont talk about frontal lobes you do not understand brain... I hate when some says I am ignorant.
--------------------
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 05:11 AM

dvk wrote:
"REP: Listen to tell you the truth ... you cancer you are seeing outside is inside you as well."

Unfortunately dvk seems incapable of translating this into English so lacking anything cogent to respond to ... I won't even try.

dvk further wrote:
"AIDS or any other disease is a manifestation of your deisres of getting Happiness or Unhappiness."

I won't even comment on this as it speaks volumes for itself. Apparently newborn infants with AIDS are just manifesting their desire to be happy. Damned kids. How dare they manifest a desire. See ... serves them right.

You may hate being called ignorant but ignorant is the word in the English language that best describes your statements. To which, it appears from the above, I should add illiterate too.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 05:28 AM

Morgan ,
Good that you still alive.
So where the people who tortured Christ.
Look at the Kid he or she is the God in the form of Child.Begging you to take away the reasons behind her disgrace.
Let her die but dont let her purpose die.
Look at the kid what kid what was her crime ...
Nothing absolutely nothing.
But due to your mistakes he has been left with no future in this world.
She was given this gift by this world for showing the ugly face it presents to itself..
Just as Christ was made to suffer because he said something right.
We gave the disease and now we are trying to cure it.
How stupid ? and You call me ignorant.
Jesus Christ.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 02:18 PM

Oh, great! Not content with wrecking the forum on his own, dkv imports his own private cheering section! Let's hear it for the trolls, folks!

Don't feed the trolls. Please.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 04:16 PM

Rose ... Kate gave you an axe ... it grows rusty from disuse.

Until such time as the two of you decide to edit with the intent of cleaning up this mess ... it would be irresponsible for such nonsense to go unchallenged.

So if you allow it ... I will challenge it.
If you act, as I wish you would, and excise it then excise my comments too. You'll not hurt my feelings to see this entire idiocy disappear.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 04:35 PM

dvk wrote:
"So where the people who tortured Christ."

Try something new: Try learning something instead of parroting idiocies. How many people did the Roman's crucify per year? Why was the suffering of any one of them any more or less than the suffering of any or all of the rest?

Why is the suffering of someone being crucified more or less important thanthe suffering of any one of the millions of people that have been tortured by Christians in the name of Christianity? Who has created the greatest amount of suffering by torture and rape? Romans or Christians?

I know you are hard of thinking but try actually responding to what has been written here rather than heading off into another one of your fantasies.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 07:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Amaranth Rose:
Oh, great!
Not content with wrecking the forum
Wrecking the forum? Wrecked the forum is more like it.
This is (was) a Science Forum. Used to be a good one.
Why not delete all of these silly 'God rants' Amaranth?
Just tell DKV, Chris Maxwell, DA Morgan, and Sachin;

"Take all of your 'God rants' to:

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (PTSD) Forums and Email Lists
http://www.mental-health-matters.com/selfhelp/f_ocd.php

Please. This is a Science Forum."


I tried to incorporate science,
but no one picked up on it.

Enough already!
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 08:35 PM

I agree with Garry. Why not delete all of these silly rants. And yes I am being serious.

I will continue to respond to this inane nonsense just as long as you create a forum for it.

Please to the planet a favour and start enforcing some rules.

Oh and start with the advertising nonsense at the bottom of this page where SAGG is proudly hosting advertising for:
"God is Love" / "Christianity" / "Real Christianity"

Yeah GodLovesTheWorld.com so darn much he tortured his only son for his personal sin of creating it in the first place. What a magnificent hypocrisy. A hypocrisy so great it just couldn't have happened without an intelligent designer.

Anyway Garry I agree with you. But not once in my years here at SAGG have I felt that Kate was truly interested in science. Though what she is interested in is as large a mystery as any.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/22/05 09:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Why not delete all of these silly rants.
And yes I am being serious.
Please to the planet a favour and start enforcing some rules.
Thank you DA Morgan. You are a good man.

Rules:

"This is the place to leave pithy comments and share your SCIENTIFIC INSIGHTS with the rest of the great unwashed readership. Play nice, STICK TO SCIENCE AND SCIENCE RELATED TOPICS. Postings containing spam, obscenity, THOSE THAT ARE ABUSIVE, threaten violence OR ARE OTHERWISE INAPPROPRIATE WILL BE REMOVED at the forum management's discretion."

http://www.scienceagogo.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?/topic/1/528.html

Thank you.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/23/05 04:05 PM

I like rock.

And classical.

And jazz.

And ....
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/23/05 06:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
I like rock.

And classical.

And jazz.

And ....
Way off topic. But too funny to cut.

Let me reassure you, changes are forthcoming. Just have a little patience for now while it gets worked out. smile
Posted by: Jack J.

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/23/05 10:51 PM

This thread has been more entertaining than educational, so keeping with the theme, I would like to share my observations of life, the universe, etc. Throughout the historical and archeological record, religion is inextricably bound to civilization. All religions incorporate practices (do this) and taboos (don?t do that) which form a social model (how folks behave to each other) and an economic model (how the community produces goods and services) which are key to the success of the community. The group with the better model will tend to prevail. The Egyptians produced strong armies and good science, the Greeks good science and wealth from trade. The Greek social model left each city with its patron god, and though wealthy, not organized (unified) enough to ward off the Romans who incorporated the Greek economics, engineering (adapting Greek and Egyptian science to their construction projects) and a strong single-state unity. The Jews at the time had a strong economic model (trade and small business, tithes reinvested in the community), robust but very limited social model: Eat this, not that, take lots of baths, etc. helped preserve health. Do not kill Jews helped strengthen the community, but their exclusivity (this is only for Jews only, chosen people clause) prevented them from ever acquiring enough of a population to be a dominate political entity. Early Christianity was week all around (Share your money, be nice to everyone), but appealed to people surrounded by Roman wealth and brutality. When the empire finally disbanded and the emperor fled to Byzantium, ambitious bishops across what used to be Roman, sized political power aligning their congregations with local strong men, set up feudal states and reinvented Christianity as Catholicism. Science, health and economics were abandoned in a struggle for power that drove Europe into the dark ages. About this same time, Mohammad came along, was very saddened by the strife through Arabia (12 gods, cities would choose a patron, and go to war with its neighbors to see whose god was stronger) studied Judaism, and did a good job selling his adaptation. One small change to the Jewish model mentioned above (Anybody can convert to Muslim) and was built the dominant culture in the western world for the next millennia. The only advance encouraged by Catholicism was art, and once this renaissance produced a critical mass of educated individuals, a new model emerged in a new religion. The Protestants adopted the Jewish economics (educate people, bathe, eat right, work hard, re-invest in the community) and ushered Europe into the age of science and industry.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/24/05 12:32 AM

Your Brain Cells May 'Know' More Than You Let On By Your Behavior

Source: Salk Institute

http://www.salk.edu/news/releases/details.php?id=150

October 19, 2005

We often make unwise choices although we should know better. Thunderstorm clouds ominously darken the horizon. We nonetheless go out without an umbrella because we are distracted and forget. But do we? Neurobiologists at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies carried out experiments that prove for the first time that the brain remembers, even if we don?t and the umbrella stays behind. They report their findings in the Oct. 20th issue of Neuron.

"For the first time, we can a look at the brain activity of a rhesus monkey and infer what the animal knows," says lead investigator Thomas D. Albright, director of the Vision Center Laboratory.

First author Adam Messinger, a former graduate student in Albright?s lab and now a post-doctoral researcher at the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md. compares it to subliminal knowledge. It is there, even if doesn?t enter our consciousness.

http://www.salk.edu/
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/24/05 04:53 AM

I wish you would have posted this as a new topic, Garry. We need new topics of this calibre.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/24/05 05:14 AM

Garry--please post as a new topic. Thanks,

"Amaranth"
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/24/05 05:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Jack J.

All human civilizations engage in self-serving hypocrisy too.

And yes Rose I am baiting you to finally let the axe fall.
Hang in there, Daniel, a compromise is in the works that should just about suit everyone's fancy. Trust me, if you can.
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/25/05 04:24 PM

Sorry I missed your posts Amaranth,
your "Origins" forum idea was wise.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/25/05 07:06 PM

Thank you for the compliment but Kate deserves the credit for making it happen. I like to think I've learned a bit in almost 5 decades. It's time to give back something to the world for what it has given me. Hence my moderating the forum. I try to do the best I can where I am with what I have to work with in the time I have.

"Amaranth"
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/26/05 04:28 AM

It's time to give back something to the world for what it has given me. Hence my moderating the forum. I try to do the best I can where I am with what I have to work with in the time I have.
REP: Rose and Kate my best wishes are for you.
I know that you have accomplished what the Men could not.
You have created something which you know is larger than life.
Its my tribute to the Woman I loved most.
My Mother
My Wife
My GrandMother
and above all to someone who is more than all.
She is the Mother Nature.
She is my God.She is my Devil.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/27/05 04:54 AM

Since I have looked at Society for so long .
I think it is my duty to tell you that Male Homosexuality is Bad.
This may sound heart breaking for some but Trust me no crime is more gravious than being a Male Homosexual...because a pure organ enters an impure channel.
Thats against the law of sex.
Even Sex has some laws just like everthing.
Please reject Male Homosexuality.
If required take a course on changing the Sex so that you live more peacefully and harmoniously with your partner.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/27/05 12:11 PM

Garry, I hope you kill this one quickly.

"Amaranth"
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/28/05 04:15 AM

Lets all kill each other quickly..
This is what you are teaching.
I bet only two members are having problem with muy posts.
Is it because I dont fit your culture ?
Is it becuase you see me as threat rather than an opportunity?
If yes then you need to vist a doctor.
No one is under any threat if the World is managed properly.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/28/05 03:00 PM

"Lets all kill each other quickly.."

Is that a threat?
Posted by: Garry Denke

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 10/31/05 01:23 PM

Moving on, from DKV threating to murder Amaranth Rose, who just so happens to be the moderator
here dkv; and All a the Posters getting back to the 'Rock', it Science, re-introduced by DA Morgan:

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
I like rock.
I like rock too, DA Morgan; you are a Good Man, to like rock.

REPRINT OF DELETED
SAGG ARCHIVE POST

The Seven (7) Rocks of Stonehenge

. . By: Garry Denke, Geologist
. . 12:00 a.m., Halloween
. . October 31st, 1996

1) Stonehenge Whitechalk - The outcrop sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Late Cretaceous Period, Santonian Age, calcium carbonate. Late Cretaceous Period outcrop sedimentary rock is the in situ construction material used by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 85 million years old. This stone is called Seaford Chalk Formation rock.

. . Fossils: The 144,000 Angels
. . Go http://www.nhm.ac.uk/ Go

2) Stonehenge Cosheston - The oldest sandstone sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Silurian-Devonian Period micaceous sandstone. Silurian-Devonian Period sandstone sedimentary rock is the first (1st) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 417 million years old. This stone is called Old Red Sandstone Formation rock.

. . Altar Stone 96-> 80: The Lamb

3) Stonehenge Coalstone - The bituminous coal sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period, Westphalian Age, carbon. Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period bituminous coal sedimentary rock is the second (2nd) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 310 million years old. This stone is called Crosskeys Coal Measures rock.

. . Coal (ashes)

4) Stonehenge Gritstone - The sandstone grit, conglomerate, limestone, shale and coal sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian), Namurian Age, silicate, calcium carbonate and carbon. Late Carboniferous (Pennsylvanian) Period sandstone grit, conglomerate, limestone, shale and coal sedimentary rock is the third (3rd) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 320 million years old. This stone is called Millstone Grit Formation rock.

. . Coal (ashes)

5) Stonehenge Bluestone - The volcanic rock (oldest geologically) of Stonehenge is Ordovician Period intrusive igneous diabase (dolerite) and extrusive igneous felsite (rhyolite) and tuff (basic). Ordovician Period igneous rock is the fourth (4th) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 470 million years old. This stone is called Ordovician Volcanic rock.

. . Footprints: The Horseshoes

6) Stonehenge Sarsen - The youngest sandstone sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Oligocene-Miocene (Tertiary) Period silicate. Oligocene-Miocene Period sandstone sedimentary rock is the fifth (5th) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 24 million years old. This stone is called Reading Formation rock.

. . Heel Stone 97-> 96: The Four (4) Beasts
. . 01) Lion Head (Weathered)
. . 02) Calf Head (Ox Without Horns)
. . 03) Face As A Man (Wounded)
. . 04) Flying Eagle Wings (Spread Out)

7) Stonehenge Whitestone - The oldest limestone sedimentary rock of Stonehenge is Early Carboniferous (Mississippian) Period, Arundian Age, calcium carbonate. Early Carboniferous (Mississippian) Period limestone sedimentary rock is the sixth (6th) construction material imported by the Stonehenge builders. This material is approximately 340 million years old. This stone is called High Tor (Birnbeck) Limestone Formation rock.

. . Fossils: The Twenty-Four (24) Elders
. . 01) Aclisina
. . 02) Aviculopecten
. . 03) Bellerophon
. . 04) Caninia cornucopiae
. . 05) Chondrites
. . 06) Cleiothyridina roissyi
. . 07) Composita
. . 08) Conocardium
. . 09) Delepinea (Daviesiella) destinezi
. . 10) Euphemites
. . 11) Girvanella
. . 12) Hapsiphyllum (Zaphrentis) konincki
. . 13) Linoproductus
. . 14) Megachonetes papilionaceous
. . 15) Michelina grandis
. . 16) Mourlonia
. . 17) Murchisonia
. . 18) Palaeosmilia
. . 19) Plicochonetes
. . 20) Rhipidomella michelini
. . 21) Schellwienella cf. S. crenistria
. . 22) Straparollus
. . 23) Syringopora
. . 24) Zoophycos

Go http://www.bgs.ac.uk/ Go

Further Reading

1) Denke, G.W. 1973. Stonehenge Phase I: An Openpit Coalfield Model; The First Geologic Mining School (Indiana University of Pennsylvania) GDG, 73: 1-56.
2) Denke, G.W. 1975. Invertibrate Paleontology of the High Tor Limestone (Lower Carboniferous) and the Upper Senonian Chalk (Late Cretaceous) of Stonehenge. (Arizona State University) GDG, 75: 1-7.
3) Denke, G.W. 1977. Possible Source Areas of the High Tor Limestone (Early Mississippian) Fill of the Aubrey Holes and Heel Stone Ditch in Europe. (Arizona State University) GDG, 77: 1-24.
4) Beus, S.S. 1984. Fossil Associations in the High Tor Limestone (Lower Carboniferous) of South Wales. (Northern Arizona University) Journal of Paleontology, 58: 3; 651-667.
5) Denke, G.W. 1984. Mid-Dinantian (Waulsortian Facies) High Tor Limestone: The First Stones Transported to Stonehenge from the South Wales Coast. (Arizona State University) GDG, 84: 1-4.
6) Denke, G. 1984. Magnetic and Electromagnetic Surveys at Heelstone, Stonehenge, United Kingdom. (Indiana University of Pennsylvania) GDG, 84: 5-42.
7) Lees, A. and Miller, J. 1985. Facies variatian in Waulsortian buildups, Part 2; Mid-Dinantian buildups from Europe and North America. (Revised) Geological Journal, 20: 159-180.
8) Geologist, Denke, G. 1986. The Paleontology of Stonehenge, England. (Arizona State University) GDG, 86: 1-3. *

* Deed Records: County of Stonewall (State of Texas) USA

END OF REPRINT

Hoping this post helps "give back" to All a the Scientists,
and Happy Halloween to Amaranth Rose and DA Morgan.

DKV not Norm.

http://www.garrydenke.com
http://www.denocoinc.com
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 11/22/05 08:59 PM

jjw004 wrote:
"I personally have never understood why there is conflict between those of science and those of a religious following"

Have you been living in a cave? Or do you expect someone else to explain why you don't understand it. The conflict is as primary as the difference between fact and fiction, truth and lie, proof and fraud. How difficult is it?

--------------------
DA Morgan about 9/21/05

jjw reply:

I guess I missed this Morgan special. Why would any one take a line from context to use it in this manner? I will explain it for you DA. I am not personally addicted to the abuse of others beliefs that I must find conflict in all things, even benign religion. The use of words like fraud, lies and fiction in response to some other persons religion are more akin to those deeply set on discrimination than on tolerance.
jjw
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 11/22/05 10:06 PM

Jim,

I agree with you completely. As always, your posts are well thought out and fair-minded. This is why you're rated at 5.

Ironically, DA is doing here exactly what he accuses organized religion of doing - demanding that we uncritically accept what he says. And he forces his point by stating that we are simply stupid if we disagree with him.

I know you are not a believer, and I can respect that - I cannot, however, respect DA's vitriolic bigotry.

He has stated that people like me are dangerous. This, without really knowing or understanding me.
I do not wish to force my views on anyone - or make schools teach ID - or enforce zero contraception - or assault abortionists - or persecute gays - or be enemies with Muslims - halt free speech - or curtail people's freedom.
I believe the church should never hold power, because it is contrary to Christ's teachings, and I am in profound disagreement with many of the Bush Administration's actions - especially concerning Iraq. I agree that science has delivered great benefit to mankind and I am grateful for it.

I would like to know in what sense DA finds me dangerous, because I actually find his intolerance dangerous, and his seeming inability to accord any value or respect to those people who believe in anything that cannot be empirically proven.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 11/24/05 05:23 AM

More than Nobel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/740688.stm
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/01/05 05:46 AM

Maturity?
As of this date in our infinitesimally advanced maturity I think it is safe to say that there is almost nothing defined as absolutely certain, except possibly, that death will take all. There is no need to shy away from your assumed ?empirical truths? or alleged knowledge. What was thought to be truth, in science or otherwise, is doubted, and history has a way of repeating itself.
jjw
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/02/05 05:07 AM

The life and death is subject of wide speculation and it has a strong relation with God especially death. The life has already taken its shape for us and thus what remains is death.
To which God do I affiliate and if there is no God then what happens to my Science.AS I Die do the knowledge that I-exist become zero in time?
If so then assuming that no one else can claim to call himself as myself,Then we can say that The Information can get lost from the system irrecoverably.Similary as I grow at somepoint of time I-Exist becomes Finite and as I can not be exactly as any other I we say that system can create knowledge.Thus Differentiation of I leading to knowledge of events .. thus conservation of Knowledge doesnt hold in both the Cases as I is lost or gained completely(using means not found in system).
Against this there lies an equally important case of Knowledge remains same as I at anypoint of time and thus Conservation of Knowledge holds as this was the net information at any point of time and it is present even now ..which is only and only I-exist.Leading to pure Quantum Mechanical effect with infinite possibilities.during decay leading to spontaneous Manifestation.
Which is real?

In our case we say both of them hold depending upon component of equation we are talking about.
In m-theory the Left side of product we denote non-spontaneous part and on the Right the Spontaneous part.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/02/05 06:58 AM

More gibberish from the king of wacky. Is it just me or is anyone else having trouble making sense out of this guy's post?
Posted by: soilguy

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/02/05 03:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Amaranth Rose:
More gibberish from the king of wacky. Is it just me or is anyone else having trouble making sense out of this guy's post?
Here. Eat these mushrooms and read the post again.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/02/05 06:27 PM

I, like Jim, have a lot of time for dkv.

This post however, presents us with three alternatives:

1. dkv is a genius, operating on a level that is incomprehensible to the rest of us.

2. dkv's grasp of English is precluding him from communicating in a way that we can understand, and the fault lies somewhere between his thought processes and the keyboard.

3. dkv is unhinged.

We should maybe have a poll.

(dkv - just joking, but this is definitely one of your more obscure posts).

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/05/05 04:45 AM

I can assure that you we are talking only sense.
The problem appears to take shape the moment I try to use the word I... It is the Science of Linguistic which says that I is a very dangerous word use it cautiously.
Since we are educated and we know that behind every sentence there is a meaning we should allow our logic and reasoning to proceed in perfect calmness .. thats not much to ask for .. is it?
Whatever I have said till now makes perfect sense.Your God will never disappoint you ..
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/05/05 05:42 AM

It may make perfect sense to you, but to me it's got a long way to go before it's understandable. I think you leave out certain critical parts that would make it more understandable. Also, all this talk about I and we is getting tangled up and needs straightening out.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/05/05 06:35 AM

Ok ...
What is I ?
I is a pure Qunatum Mechanical answer to Larger Set of Collection of Tissues, Cells and so many other processes.
It is the Answer which everyone is supposed to know about itself.
It is the sense of I which guides our understanding of a Space called C-Space or the real world.. Currently it is known to be only of biological kind.(refer Life- A question ? )


What is We ?
We is the Existence of I's in the same Space.
Not necessarily Biological.

The Space we are talking about is inherently Dual (which I call I-Space and C-Space) and are equivalent ways of understanding the World and its events.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/14/05 05:26 AM

There is something which everybody wants to know about the emotions and its value from the point of view of Psychology and Biology.
Freud had realted every psychological problem to sexual problem. No doubt he was extremely right but at the same Biology refuses to give us Exact sexual Answer.It prefers emotional bonding over Sex for obvious reasons and not only that it requests the lot to diversify the Genes thus making some relationships knitted only in emotions with weak to very weak sexual association.
How can we relate those respected and diverse fields which appear to create opposite circumstances for proper Growth of Physical and psycological Self.Many call it delayed Self Gratification Path for greater Progress.
It has evolutionary roots.
Priests practice it and I wonder how few can underestimate its importance in the World of Reflections where people visit Temple for Answers not found in Real life.A Priest stands as a real example of a peaceful life with high level of Emotional Intelligence knitted with finest moral fabric.
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/15/05 01:31 AM

Thankyou Dkv:
Possibly it is my weakened condition recovering from a serious bout of the flu or the cocktails I thought would lighten things- but your first post on this page was extremely hilarious to me.
No put down intended, just funny funny.
jjw
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/15/05 05:17 AM

Feeling Better? ;-))
Thats what is required after a long illness.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/15/05 04:01 PM

What if all of our I-Exists are really exactly the same? What if our internall observers are identical?
Our personalities, behaviors and whatnot are diffent because of genetics and environmental experiences. But what about the I-Exists? They could be the same couldn't they? Because in my mind I don't necessarily feel male or female even though my personality is extremely feminine.
It could even extend to animals. All the same internal identity just enclosed in the borders of our senses.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/16/05 05:10 AM

What if all of our I-Exists are really exactly the same?
DKV: Quite Possible if you can allow Reference to be Translated without bringing any Physical Changes in what you Observe.But we know this is not happening.In nature there is natural limit to accuracy of your results and this result depends on what kind of reference frame you choose.Most of us use Classical Mathematical Models to plot the History but unfortunately it is not working anymore for good logical reasons.
Assuming all reference frames can be translated to any level then we have a situation where the Net Information Content reduces to Nothing and also it leads to collapse of Discreetness at some level of Understanding.But in order to 'Live' the World we need Information and this translates to finding multiplicity in Nature.
However this doesnot mean that Complete Knowledge doesnt exist. All it means is that the Expression of Complete Knowledge needs the Next Evolutionary step (which appears to be beyond the Usual Mathematics).With our current fundamentals we have reached the dead end.We need some of the Brain Cells to say yes there is world beyond what I see and learn.This is how evolution works.A cell must learn something drastically new at some point of time.
============================================
What if our internall observers are identical?
DKV: What do you mean Internal Observers here?
==========================================
Our personalities, behaviors and whatnot are diffent because of genetics and environmental experiences. But what about the I-Exists? They could be the same couldn't they? Because in my mind I don't necessarily feel male or female
DKV: If you are living in Absolute Information Space then yes What you see is just the Information you completely know.Making everything look equal to something including yourself.
===========================================
even though my personality is extremely feminine.
DKV: All I can say is perfectly okay to feel feminine.And God or some final theory can never ever discriminate.This goes against the principle of Sexual Evolution.Unless some cells found the feminine state to be advantageous they would not have not chosen the so-called inferior state.Probably in the end it is the Women who rules with pride in herself for being what she is.
=============================================
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/16/05 02:06 PM

Let me try to explain my idea more clearly. I think it's somewhat radical.

For example. Each "ghost in the machine" has the same identity. Each of us have our internal dialoge, but there's also the observer of our internal dialoge. The abstract individual identity that watches us through our experiences: grief, anger, whatnot.

So when I generate an idea that's somehow grasped by my observer or innermost being, then the idea filters down into my internal dialogue where I put my idea into words. This is where all my genetics and learned social behaviors modify my expression of the originall idea because for example, I'll use learned language affected by my culture, my education, even my gender. It's proven women tend to use passive language while men use more competitive wording.

And then in order for another person to communicate with me, they read my language choices and filter it through their own judgements based on their personality, education, backround, etc. And could either resonate or bulk at my original concept causing their innermost being to feel as though it's a completely different identity.

But perhaps we have one innermost identity looking out of millions of different eyes or windows.

So the death of an individual's consciousness is more like a universal consciousness shutting or blinking an eye.

So I'm not really talking to "you", I'm merely having a conversation with myself. Taking into account layers and layers of filters between me and me.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/17/05 12:45 AM

Justine,

This is not radical or new. The idea has had an expression in Eastern Mysticism for millenia and many New-Age followers believe exactly that.

I would ask why a many-eyed Universal Consciousness constantly inflicts so much damage upon itself as the human race manages to.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/17/05 03:40 PM

originaly posted by dkv:
"The life and death is subject of wide speculation and it has a strong relation with God especially death. The life has already taken its shape for us and thus what remains is death.
To which God do I affiliate and if there is no God then what happens to my Science.AS I Die do the knowledge that I-exist become zero in time?
If so then assuming that no one else can claim to call himself as myself,Then we can say that The Information can get lost from the system irrecoverably.Similary as I grow at somepoint of time I-Exist becomes Finite and as I can not be exactly as any other I we say that system can create knowledge.Thus Differentiation of I leading to knowledge of events .. thus conservation of Knowledge doesnt hold in both the Cases as I is lost or gained completely(using means not found in system).
Against this there lies an equally important case of Knowledge remains same as I at anypoint of time and thus Conservation of Knowledge holds as this was the net information at any point of time and it is present even now ..which is only and only I-exist.Leading to pure Quantum Mechanical effect with infinite possibilities.during decay leading to spontaneous Manifestation.
Which is real?"

My reply:
cjcnakcaquantumcbdkdjmouse and that's the green turtle's choice.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/19/05 05:27 AM

Let me try to explain my idea more clearly. I think it's somewhat radical.
For example. Each "ghost in the machine" has the same identity. Each of us have our internal dialoge, but there's also the observer of our internal dialoge. The abstract individual identity that watches us through our experiences: grief, anger, whatnot.
REP:Without complicating things I think it is best possible to understand Brain as a group of I's.I mean Qunatized Information Space with different specializations. Primarily all individuals are associated with the Larger Information BalckHolish I. And this is the reason when asked our brain creates multiple answers. But ultimately the decision to correlate and associate all the information into One comes down one section of Self.This is called I(whether or not it is a fixed area is different subject matter). Thus whether you only analyze the information(by looking internally) or you observe and react (by looking externally) ... the same "I" comes into picture as it has the responsibility to associate with all other I's in your brain.Thus you as an I is one and only one.All others are just your senior officers of your body orgnaization.You are the king of yourself.And I just dont mind if somebody calls me King !!:-))
==========================================
So when I generate an idea that's somehow grasped by my observer or innermost being, then the idea filters down into my internal dialogue where I put my idea into words.
REP: I think you should abandon the sequential processing Idea.Brain doesnt like to porcess sequentially.You generate Idea like an Organization.What are you depends upon your affinity for the type of post you would like to hold in your head.
===========================================
This is where all my genetics and learned social behaviors modify my expression of the originall idea because for example, I'll use learned language affected by my culture, my education, even my gender. It's proven women tend to use passive language while men use more competitive wording.
REP: Yes. Differences are there in the attitudes and Amplitudes of Men and Women.AS women and men associate different meanings to real life.AS they understand each other they understand how weak they are with respect to the other.
==========================================
And then in order for another person to communicate with me, they read my language choices and filter it through their own judgements based on their personality, education, backround, etc. And could either resonate or bulk at my original concept causing their innermost being to feel as though it's a completely different identity.
REP:The information and processes are different but not I.In some accidents the "I" can get completely lost making the person incapable of thinking inside or outside..
==========================================
But perhaps we have one innermost identity looking out of millions of different eyes or windows.
REP: Yes thats what I said ... You are group of I's and with some one more intelligent at handling information.Which you should call as I.
=========================================
So the death of an individual's consciousness is more like a universal consciousness shutting or blinking an eye.
REP: We will try to discuss it in a seprate thread.
=============================================
So I'm not really talking to "you", I'm merely having a conversation with myself. Taking into account layers and layers of filters between me and me.
REP: Hmm .. thats a crazy idea unless you can prove me that I do not exist.:-))
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/19/05 02:35 PM

DKV,

Thank you for taking the time to analyze and respond to my ideas.

Your description of all the Is in me makes sense. Now can you tell me if my King I is always King or do I have a Royal Cabinet that takes turns wearing the crown?

If there's only one King I is it possible that all mankind's King I's are multituplits seperated at birth?

You see with this idea it's not that you, DKV, or you, Blacknad, do not exist. It's just that you are me. And the reason humanity or I inflict so much damage upon myself (or yourself) is because we don't realize this is the case.

But, this idea terrifies me, honestly. Because it makes me lonely to think it.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/21/05 10:05 AM

Your description of all the Is in me makes sense. Now can you tell me if my King I is always King or do I have a Royal Cabinet that takes turns wearing the crown?
REP: Your King is always the Same.In a democratic world it may be difficult to digest but yes the king remains the same. He is some where Localized in some Space of your brain.But who actually rules depends on your method of configuring the information. It can be balanced or Biased.Democracy can be called as a more balanced system as it gives equal footing to all (at least in theory!).

===================================
If there's only one King I is it possible that all mankind's King I's are multituplits seperated at birth?
REP: Society is just another entity which can be considerd as a seperate Living Being. It acts like a Human Being. You can also take various Business Organizations as Individuals consisting of individuals.
=======================================
You see with this idea it's not that you, DKV, or you, Blacknad, do not exist. It's just that you are me. And the reason humanity or I inflict so much damage upon myself (or yourself) is because we don't realize this is the case.
REP: Yes at some level of Understanding it is true. But can you carry the burden of I .. it is equivalent to calling yourself GOD and asking others to follow you.The Cross was the Self of Lord.
=============================================
But, this idea terrifies me, honestly. Because it makes me lonely to think it.
REP: I think you should now reconsider your opinion about your feelings ...I is pure.It is the most beautiful of all the Concepts.
It can make you feel very satisfied if you really understand the meaning of the Concept.
It can give you the ultimate security of Life.
It can act like your faith.It can make the impossible happen!!
Otherwise why will someone try to conquer the World.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/21/05 03:25 PM

So for my lifetime my King I is incapsulated by my senses. And throughout my lifetime King I learns. What happens to the learning when I pass on?
Does my learning only bennefit the life consiousness only if I use my learning to infuluence others?
And will my particular stran of the King I or my piece of God, piece of myself dissipate at my death? So I as a whole will not die, but I as Justine will no longer be experienced.

So with this concept, I get to be GOD. But I also get to die. No heaven unless we make it for ourself on earth.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/22/05 12:49 AM

Justine,

Can you explain the train of thought that leads you to believe that we are all one - without starting from an assumption?

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/22/05 07:12 AM

So for my lifetime my King I is incapsulated by my senses. And throughout my lifetime King I learns. What happens to the learning when I pass on?
REP:Your existence has already changed the Information Content of the Universe.After Death you may or may not have an option of carrying the information.But consider from the point of View of Human Learning Process and Psychology.What lesson will you like to carry on in the next possible world? Do wish to remember all the theories you were told ? Will you like to be called Ancient in your next life? Will it be possible to learn something new without forgetting some old doubt(knowledge comes from doubt)?Will you be able to cope up with the emotional consequence of finding your own people forgetting you at several occasions(slowly but surely)?
What would you like to carry in your next world?
Surely you will loose things which are false.Things which can inhibit your growth in the next possible life.Death is often called the death of some doubt.It provides something which is for certain.Beyond Doubt.Death helps life to maintain its joy.
Think if no one dies then what kind of Life we will have ? Some problems will remain forever just as some lucky guys will remain happy forever.
Some Indian Saints try to become those lucky ones but they often choose informational death over Physical Death.They reduce there Information content to one concept and then finally Nothing.
(But this is not the only way to remain to happy forever.)
==========================================
Does my learning only bennefit the life consiousness only if I use my learning to infuluence others?
REP: Your interaction no matter how small will defintely trickle down in the Ocean of Conciousness.Learning to influence others in what sense? I mean few teachers do not speak a word and tell the whole story.Its a fact.
All they demand is total surrender to their methodology.
=========================================
And will my particular stran of the King I or my piece of God, piece of myself dissipate at my death? So I as a whole will not die, but I as Justine will no longer be experienced.
REP: Again why will you like to be remembered as Justine.
I am using Evolutionary principles of Learning to derive possible meaning of Death.
yes you will definetly carry your passion.
But why? To answer this we need to more research in the physical nature of Life and Death.
=============================================
So with this concept, I get to be GOD. But I also get to die.
REP: Wise men do not disregard this fact of life.
And they know what to do without fear of destiny.
The most important part is the realization that Death offers a unique opportunity to Grow Beyond what you are today.Just as every technology needs to forget the old one without forgetting the principles...we die to forget which is ought to be forgotten and to remember whatever is worth remembering.Suicide or Murder do not give to benefit of a graceful exit.
=============================================
No heaven unless we make it for ourself on earth.
REP: Yes ... we need to make it.But the technology is very old.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/22/05 01:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Blacknad:
Justine,

Can you explain the train of thought that leads you to believe that we are all one - without starting from an assumption?

Regards,

Blacknad.
Sorry, the train of thought starts with an assumption, really, playing with the opposite of a typical assumption. Most people I know seem to believe that we are all individual souls like individual snowflakes. And I just turned that assumption around to see where it would lead me.
So the new assumption is that we are the exact same "experiencer".

Psychologists say that infants have to learn to distinguish themselves as seperate entities from their environment and their mother. A baby doesn't begin by assuming it is an individual snowflake. It's learned by interaction with reality.

Infants definitely have individual personalities from the start but the sense of self could still be identical to ours with the personality as a filter enclosing it.

Their life experience witll be completely different than mine, but their life experiencer could be identical, except for the learing they accrue over their life time. So it's almost just a different perspective in space. They are in a different body, hooked up to their own sensory connections and have had all different life trials and tribulations plus their genetic makeup is different. But other than that, inside, at at a conscious level, their conciousness could "feel" like mine.

At this point does this work for any atheists? At death the stran of consciousness and its unique "learning" could dissipate without the container of the brain. And the energy of conciousness becomes part of the force of evolution, the force of nature.

or


Does it work at all for any Christians if we add heaven as a subjective place where we slowly disrobe of our filters as our individual stran of consciousness journeys until it reunites with the force of nature or God.

or

Does it work with reincarnation if somehow all the learning isn't completely shed and multiple lives are experienced before eventually, finally, sheding the "learning" and then entering the intangible force of nature or Nirvana?

Or what if we shed everything except for lessons learned and then this learning is assimilated into the foce of nature.

All suppositon really. I'm getting a little lost in it at this point. The original basic idea questions if our individual consciousness "feels" the same or are we unique? Is there any way to test it? I don't think so. Maybe a psychologist could think of a way to test the theory. But, the subjective feeling of our identity is probably unobservable I suppose.

We may be like bubbles of awareness floating around in said same awareness.
Or
bubbles of awareness floating around in particles.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/22/05 08:08 PM

Death is often called the death of some doubt.It provides something which is for certain.Beyond Doubt.Death helps life to maintain its joy.
Think if no one dies then what kind of Life we will have ?

Rep: Yes I understand what you're saying here, but I also think that death gives us an excuse to not accept responsibility for the world we live in. Many people are not interested in the world because they are more interested in the afterlife.

================================================


Some Indian Saints try to become those lucky ones but they often choose informational death over Physical Death.They reduce there Information content to one concept and then finally Nothing.
(But this is not the only way to remain to happy forever.)

Rep: Do you mean being in a fixed state of ZEN or something along those lines? Are you speaking of Indian Saints doing this in life or in an afterlife experience?
==========================================
MY ORIGINAL QUESTION: Does my learning only bennefit the life consiousness only if I use my learning to influence others?

YOUR REP: Your interaction no matter how small will defintely trickle down in the Ocean of Conciousness.Learning to influence others in what sense? I mean few teachers do not speak a word and tell the whole story.Its a fact.
All they demand is total surrender to their methodology.

Rep: Sorry I was a little unclear. I was only talking about a trickle down effect not as in becoming a master teacher.
I meant like if I learn about kindness and am kind to my children who are in turn kind to thier children and so forth. Or if I were to invent something brilliant and it was to be implemented and used for the good of the environment or humanity after I pass on.

It really bothers me when someone asks another person to surrender to their methodology or spiritual path. I consider it as horrible as stealing someone's mind, will, and identity from them.
But I do believe in great teachers and also agree that some great teachers tell a whole story without speaking a word.
=================================================
But I as Justine will no longer be experienced.
REP: Again why will you like to be remembered as Justine.

Rep: True. I mean I can accept losing my identity if that's the way it works. And if the larger identity feels the same as my previous awareness than I would only lose or forget my characteristics (filters) and gain my pure self. It would be important for me in life to identify myself with my concious awareness but not necessarily with my personality. Otherwise It might feel as though I loose myself. So meditation is important for this reason, to get used to the feeling of pure awareness.

=================================================
I am using Evolutionary principles of Learning to derive possible meaning of Death.
yes you will definetly carry your passion.
But why? To answer this we need to more research in the physical nature of Life and Death.

Rep: will "I" carry my passion over or will my passion simply BE carried over? Is passion the fuel of evolution?

=============================================
Just as every technology needs to forget the old one without forgetting the principles...we die to forget which is ought to be forgotten and to remember whatever is worth remembering.

Rep: Do you mean humanity as a whole remembers so that humanity as a whole evolves without history repeating itself? Our humanity has things a little bungled right now. We're not forgetting the worthless and rembering the worthwhile. We may have it backwards at the moment. Hopefully, we will remember the worthwhile as a unified planet.....eventually.

Or... do you mean as an individually evolving entity, through reincarnation I only remember worthwhile information? Could be true. I feel myself evolving just in this lifetime alone.
=============================================
No heaven unless we make it for ourself on earth.
YOUR REP: Yes ... we need to make it.But the technology is very old.

Rep: when you say "technology", do you mean the information our souls remember from previous lifetimes or do you mean the information and lessons humanity has learned collectively over time?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/23/05 06:13 AM

So the new assumption is that we are the exact same "experiencer".
REP:This assumption is equivalent to saying that the Universe is completely comprehensible using some Theory.Everything can be reduced to some kind of knowledge.Thus making everything the expression of the same. True.
But what about the difference in my view and your view.My experience and your experience.
This is due to the dual nature of knowledge itself.Although complete knowledge exists it can not fully demonstrated.and using the existing technology it is not even possible to measure the Coherence between the Group memebers.(I had suggested A Group Excercise which we unfortunately left undiscussed.)
Thus Multiplicity or Multiple Interpretations of the events(and thus the experience) are due to the limited nature of Knowledge Transfer Medium.
Putting my Thoughts on a Paper is tough excercise.I Actually loose some of it while writing.Now this may sound little weird but it is a fact. The knowledge is all inside us and the moment you try to convince me ... you loose some of your understanding.Well I know it is difficult in the Age of Computers to understand such simple concepts of Uncertainity Principle and Limited Knowledge Velocity but it effects all of us.The illusion is valid consequence of Knowledge Interference which can be overcome by adopting superior technology.Who is going to give us this gift this Christmas?But the real question is Should we ask ?Our future depends on those who deny it.
=========================================
Yes I understand what you're saying here, but I also think that death gives us an excuse to not accept responsibility for the world we live in.
Many people are not interested in the world because they are more interested in the afterlife.
REP: Valid accusation if you consider them outside the Life Cycle.. but they are not.They are very much part of our Life Cycle.Ever Experienced a Miracle in your life.. Ever thought that why someone helped you for no reason.Why we go to Church or temple if it offers no real solutions? If you understand your responsibility then nothing like it.Undertake it with confidence and those who had quit will come back to help you.
==========================================
Do you mean being in a fixed state of ZEN or something along those lines? Are you speaking of Indian Saints doing this in life or in an afterlife experience?
REP: Zen is there but it is expressable.. isnt it? Thus it is no more superior than our Qunatum Science.. what I am saying here is something beyond. The Knowledge you can have complete certainity. All you need is a new technology.
A radical new approach to thought processing leading to Brain evolution.
==========================================
Sorry I was a little unclear. I was only talking about a trickle down effect not as in becoming a master teacher.
I meant like if I learn about kindness and am kind to my children who are in turn kind to thier children and so forth. Or if I were to invent something brilliant and it was to be implemented and used for the good of the environment or humanity after I pass on.
REP: Excellent Idea.After good and bad you have done gets carried to your next life(according to Gita..thats what I have read.Dont worry if you have not..)
=========================================
It really bothers me when someone asks another person to surrender to their methodology or spiritual path. I consider it as horrible as stealing someone's mind, will, and identity from them.
REP: Honestly yes. If you are happy in your Self then no should rob you off your happiness.Unless you find something or someone resonant to your own self... embrace it with Love.If something provides you better answer then I guess you will not mind giving its well deserved respect.
==========================================
True. I mean I can accept losing my identity if that's the way it works. And if the larger identity feels the same as my previous awareness than I would only lose or forget my characteristics (filters) and gain my pure self. It would be important for me in life to identify myself with my concious awareness but not necessarily with my personality. Otherwise It might feel as though I loose myself. So meditation is important for this reason, to get used to the feeling of pure awareness.
REP: Greater your Age greater are the chances of you being the Holy Entity who holds the Larger Self.Who lives longer Male or Female?
=================================
will "I" carry my passion over or will my passion simply BE carried over? Is passion the fuel of evolution?
REP: Passion is something which belongs to You in your current form.Thats why people who enjoy doing what they love to do.Work is still done but it is effortless.. pain is still there but it is sweet.Passion fuels the Evolution.Agree.Someone did more than what others were doing.
==========================================
Do you mean humanity as a whole remembers so that humanity as a whole evolves without history repeating itself?
REP: Humanity as a whole evolves and yes it has its own memory. :-))Nothing new here ... it becomes obvious for Cells but only less obvious for Humans.Thats all.It is the most difficult yet the most obvious concept to digest.Suddenly we refuse to believe in Void capable of holding Information.
=============================================
Our humanity has things a little bungled right now. We're not forgetting the worthless and rembering the worthwhile. We may have it backwards at the moment. Hopefully, we will remember the worthwhile as a unified planet.....eventually.
REP: Yes Indeed and then we will have a peaceful coexistence with everything around us.Hopefully We will all be happy.
==============================================
when you say "technology", do you mean the information our souls remember from previous lifetimes or do you mean the information and lessons humanity has learned collectively over time?
REP: We have learned few concpets we fogotten few concpets.I am talking about future we need to find a greater technology for making our dreams of knowing " What is Universe?" come true..
Amen.
Merry Christmas to all as probably this will be my last email before the day.
==============================================
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/23/05 02:21 PM

Thank you DKV,

I resonate with you on many ideas. I love the word resonate because it represents the meeting of minds and hearts while providing a description of the sensation of that meeting.

I don't know if I NEED the concept of disencarnate beings influencing reality on earth. For every miracle there is a trajedy so it doesn't prove otherwise. An atheist can have a universal understanding of life and also incorporate some religious concepts. For instance, the concept of "I AM".

I'm coming to an understanding of GOD as the entity of the continuum of life that encompasses and "is" the awareness inside all thinking beings and their relationships with one another, as well as the particles of energy and the relationship between said particles of energy which constitute life. I am understanding this GOD as an evolving entity moving towards an existance where intelligent, rational beings live in purposeful harmony with their environment and in harmony with each other, hense, in harmony with their existance. There's a chance this heaven could someday be Earth, there's certainty that it will exist somewhere because evolution is a constant forward movement. Time is irrelevent. Whether life eventually exists in community upon many planets or whether or not only on planet Earth or not on Earth at all is unimportant. The harmony of thinking creatures WILL exist in perfection.

It is my assumption that this is a neverending process because once complete harmony is achieved and GOD can no further evolve because technical and subjective perfection has been realized, than GOD collapses and regenerates with a BIG BANG because life is a constant state of movement. So GOD (life) is an eternal cycle of evolution to BANG to evolution to BANG...eternally. Heaven is eternal because the process is eternal. We are in the process of becoming Heaven.

So Christ only exists as the awareness in each other. The same goes for all the saints, prophets, and all of our relatives who have passed. All personalities are temporal but the exciting thing is that there are always NEW personalities to meet and love. And we can commune with past personalities by going within ourselves and experiencing our own awareness as their past awarenesses. Love ourselves in order to love each other. Love each other as the way to truly love ourselves.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/26/05 05:20 AM

It is my assumption that this is a neverending process because once complete harmony is achieved and GOD can no further evolve because technical and subjective perfection has been realized, than GOD collapses and regenerates with a BIG BANG because life is a constant state of movement. So GOD (life) is an eternal cycle of evolution to BANG to evolution to BANG...eternally. Heaven is eternal because the process is eternal. We are in the process of becoming Heaven.
DKV: AS I said there is nothing called as NeverEnding. God(or Godliness) can be reached.
What makes things never Ending is the technology.
The limitation of the medium of expression.
Including the theory which I had laid down for the mass benefit.The net result is a continumm of Answers.It says the degree of possibilities increase or decrease with your technology.
If landing on the Moon rules your imagination then there must be a much more efficient means to do so.Otherwise why so much of Space has been wasted when all you were asking for was the Moon.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/27/05 03:10 PM

Interesting point. So would you say technology is the material representation of our subjective passion (imagination, hunger,)? That our passion is our SEARCH for happiness, knowledge, inner peace, etc.?
But I wonder, if we were to find inner peace, would it be in reaching with our technology towards the moon and beyond?
Or would we find inner peace by reaching with our technology towards the earth, within nature's fragile balance and within each other?

You said Godliness can be reached. If that's true then that implies reason for search.

Perhaps Godliness can be realized instead of "reached".

I can realize that at the deepest level everyone around me feels just like me at thier deepest level. They just have different perfections and imperfections than I do. And the concept of God feels just like me without the imperfections. And the concept of Devil is just me WITH all the imperfections.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/28/05 05:12 AM

Interesting point. So would you say technology is the material representation of our subjective passion (imagination, hunger,)?
REP:This question has immediate consequence of asking who was the first Man.When did he first imagine and what?
I would like to give this answer later but let ask a more interesting and reachable answer.
When was the Universe Born ?We reply as if there was a time when it never existed.
Now imagine Universe as a consequence of Subjective Interpretation of some Ancient Man.
So it becomes a brilliant answer to your question ..Evolvution is all about becoming that Ancient One.It is drastically different than what current Science would tell you. But the advantage here is that you get to know your ultimate Goal...And gives meaning to your existence.It gives all of us a supreme father.
=====================================
That our passion is our SEARCH for happiness, knowledge, inner peace, etc.?
REP: Yes.Indeed.
========================================
But I wonder, if we were to find inner peace, would it be in reaching with our technology towards the moon and beyond?
REP: Why not ? I mean if someone can discover America and make it make a World to remember in almost every memory...Then why cant we ask for more ...but sadly the sequential evolutionary method doesnt work. Some will like to go the Moon and Beyond and Some will like to go beyond Galaxie and Some will like to be the Ancient Man(or whatever).
There many immediate Options but only one final Answer.
==========================================
Or would we find inner peace by reaching with our technology towards the earth, within nature's fragile balance and within each other?
REP:Honestly there is a need to see Earth in a new light of this discovery.Why is it required for us to remain alive on this planet? How does it matter to the poor, weak and depressed?
Answers you will have to find in our evolutionary Past.
===========================================
You said Godliness can be reached. If that's true then that implies reason for search.
REP:Yes if Godliness means knowing all.All can be known and it offers benefit similar to what humans have over Monkeys.
========================================
Perhaps Godliness can be realized instead of "reached".
REP:The process of Reaching leads to Realization. It is as mechanical as that.
But without anyone of them the question is meaningless.
===========================================
I can realize that at the deepest level everyone around me feels just like me at thier deepest level. They just have different perfections and imperfections than I do. And the concept of God feels just like me without the imperfections.
And the concept of Devil is just me WITH all the imperfections.
REP: Sincerely your emotional valuation of Devil needs to replaced by Knowledge.All your imperfections need to be understood in the light of Knowledge.Why is it that imperfections exist in the first place?
The very seed which gave us perfection also gave us imperfection.It is possible to go beyond both.
The love and knowledge makes this possible.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/28/05 07:13 AM

Since most of the time we find ourselves rotating around some concpet .. I wonder how many of see something very obvious here.
As an illustration of the concept of Consciousness I would like to share some more ideas with you.
It is important for all of us to really feel the impact of new ideas in terms of our fears and opportunities.

Think of Monkeys who are very smart.
They know how to get things done.
But still something is found missing in their evolutionary change.. they have not invented fire.They have failed to grasp the concept of Holding on to the fire(Generated or Natural).
Why cant the society of Monkeys learn to burn the fire during the Winters?
Or at least hold fire in their defence.
They are afraid of it.
In their Conciousness they need to overcome this fear in order to take the next step.
How do they see this photonic technology?
They see it as a threat.
Individually they may have a good reason to fear it.
But why do they fail collectively if there is anything called as additive Supreme Conciousness...(It exists let us assume)
If we are talking about a small sample of Monkeys then such a miracle is not expected to happen.
But when we think about them collectively in large numbers then we can definitely ask for more interesting answers..

Naturally there was something missing in their collective Understanding and it was just the numbers.Just after having a sufficient numbers some interesting decisions were taken and some evolved into Humans and then they forgot about their past.
And I am sure that this particular missing link which they discovered was to learn to cooperate with Weak Intelligent Memebers outside the concept of Physical Strength Supremacy.
Inevitably the Jungle law refuses to let the Weak Prosper.. but havent we grown beyond this age old concept.

In Our case we understand the importance of helping the weak or poor.The desire to help others comes to us instinctively ..before we called it a fashion.And the reasons are embedded in our past ...where we detached the meaning of Weak from Mentally Weak...
The weak was given his share of Food and Sex without much physical bullying.
It was the first Wierd Decision we ever took and since then we have created history.
A history which appears like a Movie now as we have forgotten everything about it.
We now tracking back our existence.
Thus in Evolutionary Cycle there are multiple Origin Points .... depending upon your belongingness.(Hope it solves the Origin Problem)
Now let us take the case of Universe ...
What ever we have known and whatever we have experienced was true to the extent of being some xyz kind of species..
Now what does the next evolution demands .. it demands a new technology of Life.
Where does this technology comes from ?
A good source to know will be our fears... what do we collectively fear in our struggle for Survival?
What were the Monkeys afraid of?
They were afraid of loosing their traditional mental process.The number of known Topics which they discussed would have suddenly decreased as all their learned instincts were told to be wrong.
Effortless communication process was asked to change suddenly .. just as if we ask Satellites to change their dates to be in sync with Earth Time.
The number of events in the sexual space decreased to some single controversy.
Whether weak's suggestion that fire can help us in almost every field should be acknowledged or not and as a consequence whether his followers should be allowed to live in Peace or not.For them the Fire was the God ...
Someone's fear was someone's God.
For many years they knew its value before starting to realize it.
And then slowly the number of Topics increased to make us what we are today.

Assume that even today we are facing a similar case.We are asked to believe in the new power of technology.
Technology of consciousness.
Technology which gave us so many answers is now asking us to accept a radically new self centered concept.
Thats what has helped us to trace our past.
Isnt it true that we are deeply divided along these lines?Psychological Doctors will hunt any down who belives in this kind of Idea ... but its the fire Monkeys were afraid of.
Isnt it true that we need to acknowledge the value of Consciousness?
Isnt it true that its power largely remains untapped?
Isnt it true that the power to live in "Universe" makes our future much more interesting and alive?
It can make our relationship very rich with the Supreme Being.
It satisfys both the male and female aspirations.
Hope it gives you a brighter picture of the future.
MGB
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/29/05 01:31 PM

True, we have to move beyond fear to grasp the true essense of Ancient Mind.

Funny, on another link we were discussing what someone who could think, but lost all senses would do. Someone said they would probably try to visualize a game of chess to play with themselves.

So why wouldn't an Ancient Mind do the same thing? Split itself into a billion perspectives and work out harmony between these perspectives as a great puzzle a great game. The origin of life was merely setting up the game board within the Ancient Mind itself.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/29/05 05:41 PM

Pantheism vs. Panentheism

what's your preference?

http://www.webwyte.com/alan/pan.htm
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 12/29/05 09:57 PM

So why wouldn't an Ancient Mind do the same thing? Split itself into a billion perspectives and work out harmony between these perspectives as a great puzzle a great game. The origin of life was merely setting up the game board within the Ancient Mind itself.

Justine, do you really believe this?

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/03/06 03:48 PM

Mostly, I'm in a very vulnerable, flexible, open minded, undecided place as far as my beliefs go. I haven't found a box to keep myself in.
Even atheists are more protected than me. Certainty is safe.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/03/06 06:39 PM

This concept that I've been exploring looks as though it leads to Pantheism vs. Panentheism. I think I like Panentheism better as far as integrating it into a working belief system for myself. Appears to be akin to my train of thought and then some. I'm going to read up on it and see how it fits.


www.websyte.com/alan/process.htm
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/05/06 02:37 PM

Panentheism leads to Process Philosophy. Looks like I have a lot of reading ahead of me. This has been a journey for me on this forum. I never would have found Process Philosophy in the bookstore. The label is so drab. Quite a disguise. Thank you forum smile Thank you DKV and Blacknad smile
And mostly thanks to whoever posted the word Pantheism. I can't remember who that was and I can't remember if they said Panentheism instead, but it was the keyword I needed. Thanks to that person who self-disclosed. And thank you to Amaranth Rose and Kate for setting up this space and for keeping the origins discussions even though they stray from scientific material.
I've never been motivated to keep a journal, but through all this posting I really discovered some things for myself.
Not to mention being able to see that even the best minds struggle with uncertainty.
Thank you, Thank you

Peace,
Posted by: soilguy

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/05/06 09:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Justine:
Even atheists are more protected than me. Certainty is safe.
Justine: Atheists are not necessarily "certain." In fact, I would guess that most are not. An acquaintance of mine describes himself as a negative atheist, which he says is an atheist that just hasn't seen convincing evidence that a God exists. Then there are the more vocal positive atheists who have some certainty that a God doesn't exist.

I consider myself a pantheist (which many consider another word for atheist). Panentheism is attractive, too, but I have no personal experience that leads me to think that it must be true. With pantheism though, all you need to do is prove to yourself that things exist, that God is defined by "all that exists," and therefore, God exists.

OK, now that I've determined that God exists, I have the rest of my life to try and understand the nature of this God.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/06/06 03:38 PM

Oh Hi Soilguy,

I was starting to think I that I was just posting to myself smile

Your friend's negative atheism sounds a lot like " an atheist until proven otherwise" and that's the sense I get from many people who call themselves agnostic, even though the term really means, "one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god." (subtle difference)

I have this book here I've for some reason barely started reading. Rediscovery of Awe Splendor, Mystery, and the Fluid Center of Life, by Kirk J. Schnieder, Ph.D. He's developed the term Enchanted Agnostic. I think many scientists are probably Enchanted Atheists ...I know the ones in my family are.

My fear in committing to Atheism....
If reality and existance were like a televison set, no matter how remarkable all the pieces of the mechanism were and how they work.....I'd hate to have missed the show.
You know what I mean?

Synchronicity, Serendipity, or even an "Ah Ha", momment......my only personal experiences with a Universal Awareness that have not been possibly dillusional.

I could see myself committing to Panentheism with synchronicity, serendipity, and "ah ha" momments being my momments of connection with that great mystery. On the other hand, I could view even those momments as a sort of misinterpretation or misunderstanding of reality.

I do believe in God in either a Pantheisitic or Panentheistic sense, I've gotten that far. smile I just can't committ to which one. (subtle diffence from agnostic non-committment) So I as you have determined that God exists, and have the rest of my life to try to understand the nature of this God. Thank you for letting me know that I am not alone smile
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/06/06 06:40 PM

These so called negative atheists are nothing but agnostics. A true atheist would arrive at the gates of heaven -or hell and say; "I must have gone insane or got amnesia whilst in a VR system."
Similarly, a true believer would look even the most overwhelming evidence that no god exists and see it as a 'test of faith.'

I myself am what I call a true-hedonistic-atheist, meaning I realise (or believe that) life and everything is merely a product of universal laws, and any meaning we find in it is ALSO a product of universal laws. Nonetheless -I enjoy the hell out of it! smile
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/07/06 06:06 AM

Come on Rob ... a true atheist that arrived at the gates of heaven would do what every hypocrite wearing a cross, a star-of-david, or other emblem of faith would do ... consider the simple fact that an enternity of heaven would be no different from an eternity in hell.

Then they'd all set up a community somewhere in the middle and get down to a decent game of soccer.

You can't really believe that all of these prosletyzers are anything other than hypocrites. Put them in the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center as patients and every one of them would be willing to sell his or her sould on eBay for a cure. Feel free to ask me how I know.

But it is good to see, from the above, you are a rational being. Better enjoy it now folks ... this is all there is.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/07/06 09:35 AM

So why wouldn't an Ancient Mind do the same thing? Split itself into a billion perspectives and work out harmony between these perspectives as a great puzzle a great game. The origin of life was merely setting up the game board within the Ancient Mind itself.
REP: You are very close to the actual game. But unlike chess the rules are not hardcoded.The rules change.The universe is adaptive.It adapts to what your strength of belief.
Thats something which becomes obvious if start looking at ourselves as ordinary manifestation of laws embedded in nature.In one of the examples I had discussed about the Bird which evolved simple out of desire, no design doucments were shared between them.And then there was the game of Fire which is outside the game rule for most of the species.
The game which we are talking about has a definite purpose.It is a real manifestion of a hypothetical concept.It is like opening another move by extending the chessboard and inventing new pieces and defining new rules for them.
And Some old rules decay.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/07/06 10:25 PM

dvk wrote:
"the rules are not hardcoded" and "It adapts to what your strength of belief" and "The game which we are talking about has a definite purpose"?

And you know this how? The tooth fairy told you?
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/08/06 04:59 PM

"Feel free to ask me how I know."

Ok, how do you know?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 04:00 AM

Spent 42 days in the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center with my wife. 42 days as in 16+ hours a day. Met with many patients. Met with many family members. Still keep in contact with some as very strong bonds are built between people sharing the same foxhole.

Never met a single person, no matter how convinced they had been the day before in their religion, that wouldn't have sold their soul right there and then for a cure. Belief in a wonderful hereafter never survives the test of facing it for real except in the mentally challenged who were incapable of reasoned thought in the first place.

The same is true in war. And again I have just a little bit of personal experience. All people in combat know the very incoming round may have their name on it. They know, for sure, they may be no more than an instant away from finding out, first hand, whether their religion is fact or fiction.

And how many, in that situation, throw down their weapons and follow the advice of Jesus Christ, turn the other cheek, forgive their enemies, and stand-up as an act of religious conviction and let god take them if he wishes. Think of a very very small number.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 05:34 AM

You have said so many things but you have not appreciated me once .. can I ask you why?
I offer solutions.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 09:31 AM

DA Morgan,

You speak out of ignorance so can hardly be blamed. Why would you get to hear about the 60,000 plus Christians martyred for their faith on an annual basis.

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=79

Based on eyewitness accounts of those who have fled the North Korean dictatorship, the stories curdle the blood. For instance, in the building of a highway near Pyongyang, a house was demolished and a Bible was discovered hidden between bricks. Along with it was a list identifying a Christian pastor, two assistant pastors, two elders, and 20 members of the congregation.


All were rounded up and the five Christian leaders were told they could avoid death if they denied their faith and swore to serve only Kim Jong Il and his father, Kim Il Sung, the founder of the communist dictatorship. Refusing to do so, they were forced to lie down and a steamroller used in the highway construction was driven over them. The report continues, ?Fellow parishioners who had been assembled to watch the execution cried, screamed out, or fainted when the skulls made a popping sound as they were crushed beneath the steamroller.?

Hardly stacks up with the following statement:

'Belief in a wonderful hereafter NEVER survives the test of facing it for real except in the mentally challenged who were incapable of reasoned thought in the first place.
'

As you are so fond of calling others to account when they make statements without reference, that cannot be supported, you may want to try avoiding it yourself.

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 12:48 PM

Some people, when they are un-happy - kill themselves, whether they believe in an afterlife or not. If these morons believed in an afterlife, that's all the more reason for them to choose to die.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 03:26 PM

I don't know about the hospital patients being testiments against faith. But, I do understand your point about people being willing to sell their soul for a cure.
It IS a testiment to love, though. Because the family members of the patients would equally have given anything to help alleviate the suffering of the people they love. It may be just as hard to watch someone you love suffer than it is to endure the physical suffering yourself.

Some of the situations I've endured I wouldn't wish on my worst enemey let alone someone I love, but I'm glad I suffered them because they give me character. I wouldn't trade them.

Suffering is one way of showing us who we really are. If our emotional strength wasn't tested by suffering, then we'd never know our true selves.
As in DA's example, in supporting someone through cancer. There are a lot of people who can't handle it. They wouldn't be able to go to the hospital. They wouldn't be able to meet and get to know anyone because the personal emotional pain would be too intense. But it's so worth it to show someone how much they are loved. So worth it to show yourself how much love you embody.

Some people never get to fall in love. Would those of us who have loved trade falling in love and the suffering we endure because of it for never having loved at all? Imagine your life ignorant of love... ignorance is a kind of bliss .... but that bliss is incomparable to the bittersweet emotional experience of love and suffering.

I guess love and suffering are our rewards for existing.

I guess the world of suffering could exist just so we can appreciate an eternity of peace. The meaning of life could simply be to endure suffering.

I like the idea of an eternal peaceful existance. To experience love without suffering and live with beauty.

With the idea of the Ancient Mind... It would have to create at least a small amount of suffering for each of us in order to experience peace, right? It wouldn't recognize peace without experiencing suffering first.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/09/06 04:41 PM

I'll not debate love with you Justine because I agree so lets not change the subject.

The point I am making is simply that those that from the safety of their own beds proclaim their faith are hypocrites. They all lose their faith when confronted with reality.

BTW folks ... feel free to volunteer your time working in a cancer ward at a local hospital if you want to get find that place where theory is forced to come face-to-face with fact.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 01:11 PM

Justine,
Just so we're clear -do you believe in life after death?

In response to your post, the fact that people wouldn't 'turn back time' to undo their suffering is only because they have adapted to their new life. When you get the news that a family member or close friend has died, I doubt you will not-be wishing it hadn't happened. Perhaps in the future, when you have coped with the issue, you would wish not 'go back'. This is because going back would be the equivalent to suicide -you'd be erasing your life! Obviously no one would want to do that!
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 02:19 PM

Rob, I haven't decided if I believe in life after death, yet, and am completely uncertain about almost everything related to the meaning of life, God, who we really are, etc. It's annoying and uncomfortable. And unfortunately, I'm addicted to thinking about these things.

I have experienced deaths of family members, three were at the end of long lives, and one was an early death and completely tragic. My heart broke. Two of those people I still miss and think about an awful lot.

In the case where the death was a real tragedy, I WOULD sacrifice erasing two years of my life in order to have that person back on Earth. Even though I learned about heart break I would give up that learning.

I guess there is a difference between my suffering and witnessing loved ones' suffering. You're right, I don't want to erase my own character development (but I would erase other's experience for them????). That's hypocritical isn't it? Hypocritical and paternalistic. Well, we know GOD or the powers that be do not erase suffering so I guess it or they experience the suffering, too. Imagine if we could rewind and erase our lives at our own whim. Would we ever get anywhere at all?

DA, most people close to death turn to God even more so at that moment. In fact, I think a lot of people forget about their faith UNTIL moments of trial. Not to mention, that when a loved one is suffering sometimes there's nothing else to do except pray. Lots of people pray because they want to help somehow but can't do anything else. I would guess that a great deal of people pray during great suffering and at the moments of their own death.

I understand the point you are trying to make but I don't think it works in the scenerio you describe. When times get tough people draw strength from their belief systems instead of giving them up.
Ok Ok... but here's a better scenerio for your point.
Let's say someone prays and prays to their God to save their loved one or to manipulate their reality somehow and then their God doesn't come through for them. They experience great loss...in those cases I can imagine people letting go of a faith they may have entertained when everything in their life was easy. Yeah, it works in that situation. Is that what you meant? I have to go back and read your post again.
It's not DURING the struggle. It's AFTER the struggle is lost and there's nothing left to do but grieve. We were let down and nothing made sense in the long run. That's when we loose our faith. Because it didn't come through for us and in the end we couldn't depend on it. Yep, you're right.

But, what about when prayer does work. Has that whole experiment been up for peer review. The one about prayer benefitting recovery in the medical setting?
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 07:44 PM

Don't worry about anything, as soon as we discover how to teleport, everyone and everything in the universe will become immortal. Aliens may have already discvered how to teleport, therefore the entire universe may already be immortal. On the other (more probable) hand, teleportation is impossible. Oh well...
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 08:21 PM

"The point I am making is simply that those that from the safety of their own beds proclaim their faith are hypocrites. They all lose their faith when confronted with reality."

Dan,

I get what you are saying. I imagine that it is more than likely that I will die in some drawn out way, cancer or such. I cannot say whether I would give up on my faith, or grasp at everything apart from God to cling to life. I would hope not, and many do not, but in that nihilistic moment when everything breaks down before me and I realise that I am either facing my maker or oblivion, I cannot say how I would react. I am a weak individual at the best of times; I lived in the Middle East for a time and once found myself in an exclusive Shia Muslim anti-Westerner area by mistake. A place where a white boy like me doesn't go. Everywhere I walked people stopped what they were doing to stare. I am told that I was lucky that I wasn't taken. I know this - to be captured and tortured is my worst nightmare, and if someone was pulling my fingernails out, one after the other, I don't know whether I would denounce God to gain some respite - I hope not, but I haven't faced it yet. Well thinking about it, I am pretty sure I could last through the fingernails, but there are parts of my body that would be a greater test.

What I do know is that whether God actually exists or not is certainly not predicated on my ability to remain faithful.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 08:41 PM

You're white!? You had me fooled.

Many of these silly torture victims would denounce god at that moment and resume the belief many years later when they are snug in their beds with some hot-chocolate, with the belief that they would be forgiven for their betrayal. What does this tell you about them?

The subject of torture brought madness to my mind (since the purpose of some tortures is to make the victim mad enough to not know what they are saying or revealing), so how does your religion explain what happens to these people that have senile dementia, multiple personality syndrome, amnesia etc... Do people with multiple personalities have multiple souls?

Here's a funny story, in Britain we have this thing called the Alpha Course, for christians to strengthen their belief. I went to 3 sessions as a favour to someone -later I was so proud of being an atheist that I made myself an atheist logo -THESE PEOPLE WERE ABSOLUTE MORONS. We would all sit in a circle like a bunch of saps and ask questions, my question one time was the multiple personality one, want to know the answer I got? Oh, ah, well (long pause) that question requires a lot of thought, shall we talk about it next week? Did they talk about it next week, yup -you guessed it -NO.

P.S. I don't actually wear the atheist logo. It was just made in the spur of the moment.
I'm not that sad. smile
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 10:33 PM

Refusing to [renounce their faith], they were forced to lie down and a steamroller used in the highway construction was driven over them.

It seems that these Christians just can't win. They showed immense conviction of belief and courage and paid the ultimate price, but according to Rob they are morons.

If they had aquiesced, and saved their skins, then according to Dan they are hypocrites.

The moral for Christians is: Whether you're facing Dan, Rob, or Kim Jong Il, don't expect any sympathy.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 10:53 PM

Do people with multiple personalities have multiple souls?

No, multiple personality syndrome is simply a psychological issue. These personas are distinct from the 'inner self' and are only manifestations of different aspects of one personality, used as a defense mechanism, usually when great trauma has been endured.

The idea of body, soul and spirit was stolen from greek philosophy and has no origin in Hebrew thought. Many theologists would dispute this kind of triality. Also, the idea that there is a part of us existing as a physicality, and also a part existing in a seperate spiritual dimension or state is not necessarily a part of modern theology.

I will not defend Alpha Christians - most Christians have never thought long enough or deep enough about what they believe, but just accept what church leaders tell them.

I will not defend the church either, but I find Christ to be consistent and dependable.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/10/06 10:54 PM

You're white!? You had me fooled.

LOL.


Blacknad.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 03:36 AM

Blacknad:
Do you know any persons with multiple personality disorder? Do you understand what causes it?
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 11:21 AM

Does this dog have multiple personalities or what?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8689366181727845562

I'm serious; does this dog have some sort of mental deficiency?
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 02:14 PM

Rob,
The Alpha Program is in America, too. I've been to it....dvd showings of the British course. That guy is charming, though. I think I was a little sick of him after 4 or so classes, too, though.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 06:57 PM

Blacknad:
Do you know any persons with multiple personality disorder? Do you understand what causes it?


- Amaranth, good question and by what I wrote, obviously not. I just recycled stuff I thought I knew about it, without checking my facts.

I worked at a residential home in '93 - '94 where a girl had three distinct personalities - she had suffered extreme abuse, and this anecdotal evidence coupled with things I have read or heard in the past lead to my statement.

Obviously spending a little time 'netting' it, I can see that my comments were quite ignorant. There are many proposed reasons for dissociative identity from the wild and wacky to the idea of a purely different physical brain structure.

One of the things that would lead me to think that it is a fragmenting of a previously existing coherent personality is the following:

'Lack of MPD among children: If MPD is created by intolerable levels of child abuse during childhood, then one would expect to find MPD symptoms among many children. But MPD seems to be found almost exclusively among adults. In the years prior to 1979, only one case of MPD in a child was reported. By 1988, only 8 new cases had been found. By 1990, 9 additional cases were reported. This represents a minuscule percentage of the total MPD diagnoses.'

So a reaction to trauma may be out of the window, but it seems to be something that people develop - I am not sure that people are born with it. However, I'm not in a position to rule it out.

It's interesting and I'll read more - but that'll teach me to write without thinking.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 07:06 PM

Rob,

From what I know, people with MPD experience a complete shift from one personality to another, and sometimes will not even remember being the other person.

Great video, this dog is showing two distinct things happening at once.

It may be a disorder incorporating different selves. I suppose it could equally be that the reflex that causes it to scratch itself is triggering without it being consciously aware of it and it is freaking it out.

The dog should definitely be in a lab.

Alternatively you may be the first person to diagnose a dog with MPD.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Philege

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 08:13 PM

Blacknad:
Do you know any persons with multiple personality disorder? Do you understand what causes it?


- Amaranth, good question and by what I wrote, obviously not. I just recycled stuff I thought I knew about it, without checking my facts.

I worked at a residential home in '93 - '94 where a girl had three distinct personalities - she had suffered extreme abuse, and this anecdotal evidence coupled with things I have read or heard in the past lead to my statement.

Obviously spending a little time 'netting' it, I can see that my comments were quite ignorant. There are many proposed reasons for dissociative identity from the wild and wacky to the idea of a purely different physical brain structure.

One of the things that would lead me to think that it is a fragmenting of a previously existing coherent personality is the following:

'Lack of MPD among children: If MPD is created by intolerable levels of child abuse during childhood, then one would expect to find MPD symptoms among many children. But MPD seems to be found almost exclusively among adults. In the years prior to 1979, only one case of MPD in a child was reported. By 1988, only 8 new cases had been found. By 1990, 9 additional cases were reported. This represents a minuscule percentage of the total MPD diagnoses.'

So a reaction to trauma may be out of the window, but it seems to be something that people develop - I am not sure that people are born with it. However, I'm not in a position to rule it out.

It's interesting and I'll read more - but that'll teach me to write without thinking.

Regards,

Blacknad.


Demons! I'm telling you, these are demons.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/11/06 11:41 PM

There is a book about multiple personality disorder writtan by a person who has the problem. It it "When Rabbit Howls" by the troops for Truddi Chase. It is an excellent description of the problen and may lead to valuable insights.

I think the reason it does not get diagnosed in children more frequently is because children who have it have a personality that always shows up in the presence of medical personnel, so no medical person would observe it because the child always is consistent around them. It's only when you observe over a long period of time in various situations that the truth comes out.

And no, they are not demons. They are fragments of a whole personality that arise to deal with specific issues and abusers. The real demons are in the ones who perpetrated the child abuse in the first place. They are truly demon possessed, in my humble opinion.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/12/06 01:08 PM

No, they just have another kind of mental disorder.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/12/06 01:15 PM

No, they just have another kind of mental disorder.

- I think Amaranth was just making a point. It didn't extend to an admission of the existence of demons.

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/13/06 06:30 PM

phew! smile
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/14/06 04:54 AM

Unfortunately I am not feeling well to help keep the discussion as real as it used to be.
But still the objective of the topic remains to understand the essential role of the Conciousness in the Making of the Universe.
All diseases are merely born out of the desire to be close to the top of the Mayan or illusionist chain of successes and faileurs when none is happening.
The system itself provides you reasoned answers to keep you bounded in this chain.
Break the chain and you reach to the Self which is eternal and all prevailing and beyond Mathematical Reasoning.
It takes practice to do so.. it is not possible to make it happen in one day.
(Well this is not a call to convert.:-)) Remain what you are with dignity.. no one is superior to Nature.. no one till you find yourself)
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/17/06 02:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dkv:

All diseases are merely born out of the desire to be close to the top of the Mayan or illusionist chain of successes and faileurs when none is happening.
I can understand this line of thinking just in looking around at all the diseases, accidents, illnesses, natural disasters, etc. that people face. Everyone's got something to overcome. Does anyone know anybody who has lived an average lifespan without any suffering or imperfection at all?
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/17/06 03:20 PM

If we were to assume that life is not pointless and has meaning... I do see alot of learning in all these crazy defects, illnesses and suffering.

It seems like the soul has to learn to give up control. Let others take care of us. Other people or a higher power. Or maybe they are one in the same.

It's such a huge thing to realize we can't control our lives...we influence our lives but we do not have control.

That's the big first step that heals many addicts. That first step...I can't remember the wording but I understand the first steps basically encourage the individual to realize they can't control their addiction and turn over the reigns to their higher power (and each other)....And it works...Weird but true.

Religion can be a form of control or a way for us to control our reality, too. People who live beyond the rules, secularly, give up that control.

If we can realize and accept that we don't control anything, that we only have some influence on even our own lives...maybe so many harsh lessons wouldn't be presented to us. And the other side to those lessons are that though we can't always manage (control) our life on our own, many challenges are manageable when we depend on each other.

It's an interesting thought if we are all one organism made up of the illusion of being seperate parts and we are trying to teach ourself that single lesson through all kinds suffering. Suffering well joy as well because we learn interdependence through love and joy, too.

Funny how all the natural psychosocial developmental stages teach us autonomy when the real lesson (meaning?) in life is interdependence.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/18/06 07:18 AM

If we were to assume that life is not pointless and has meaning... I do see alot of learning in all these crazy defects, illnesses and suffering.
REP: Yes ... there is a lot to learn.Every disease has a leasson in built into it.Its for the benefit of Life to carry on itself for the longest time.Indeed Life itself wants to remain immortal.
=========================================
It seems like the soul has to learn to give up control. Let others take care of us. Other people or a higher power. Or maybe they are one in the same.
REP: Interesting but once you loose you know you have gained yourself.You are in the domain of Peferction where the linearity is merely your answer to impress others and non-linearity is to make your own self the desire of Universe.
Universe attracts you like your soulmate who obeys your every desire.
=============================================
It's such a huge thing to realize we can't control our lives...we influence our lives but we do not have control.
REP: Answer to that is we often mess up our own lives by ignoring the underlying truth of Nature.
Just like m-theory.It happens before every revolution.Not a surprise to me but sadly it still surprises not many.
=======================================
That's the big first step that heals many addicts. That first step...I can't remember the wording but I understand the first steps basically encourage the individual to realize they can't control their addiction and turn over the reigns to their higher power (and each other)....And it works...Weird but true.
REP: Addicts or no-addicts it doesnt matter.Life gave you a gift .. just like Alexander got his own and used for his own desires.
=============================================
Religion can be a form of control or a way for us to control our reality, too. People who live beyond the rules, secularly, give up that control.
REP: Hmmm.. Secularly the nature treats everyone on the same footing.Gives you a lot.So much that no Weirdo can give you.It offers you the Universe and they all they promise is some short story.

If we can realize and accept that we don't control anything, that we only have some influence on even our own lives...maybe so many harsh lessons wouldn't be presented to us. And the other side to those lessons are that though we can't always manage (control) our life on our own, many challenges are manageable when we depend on each other.

It's an interesting thought if we are all one organism made up of the illusion of being seperate parts and we are trying to teach ourself that single lesson through all kinds suffering. Suffering well joy as well because we learn interdependence through love and joy, too.

Funny how all the natural psychosocial developmental stages teach us autonomy when the real lesson (meaning?) in life is interdependence.
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/18/06 04:47 PM

DKV, "Life itself wants to remain immortal"

Rep: Good one. Still open to discussion, though.
Does life as a whole desire anything? I agree life as a whole tends toward immortality.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/18/06 07:01 PM

So does the ocean. Does that make it a sentient conscious entity? Not a good one ... meaningless drivel. Life is NOT a thing.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 04:35 AM

After a long time I heard Morgan say something really interesting. Life is also an existence of Desire. If you have a scenario where something tends to model itself as the desire then without exaggerating it is alive. Yesterday I heard an interview of Sir Roger Penrose on BBC.BBC finally asked him is there any God? I wished I was there to help him handle that question but you see I have my own limitations:-)) Anyways the question of conciousness is still alive and will remain alive till we do not accept the existence of Nature and Supreme Conciousness.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 05:19 AM

dvk again said something par for the course: "Life is also an existence of Desire."

Every fungus, every amedboe, every jellyfish, every diatom, every yeast cell ... a seething blob of desire.

Have you considered writing for a porno magazine?
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 03:04 PM

I think he was using the term desire as in motivation.
I think that's the IE vs evolution debate.
Does life currently have motivation?
Or was there only the original movement at the Big Bang? And life is just the ripple effect.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 06:59 PM

I could see a rock at a certain angle and spend my whole life speculating on the position of that rock, the shape, the colour, I could ask why at this time in that space is that rock the way it is - why not a little to the left, why not a slightly darker shade? I could speculate on the origin of the rock, or I speculate on the origin of myself, or on the origin of the sun and clouds behind that rock, and at night I could speculate on the origins of the stars cascading across the sky. What ever aspect of nature I speculate on, one day, if I am smart, I will realise that I am in-fact speculating on only one thing, and that is nature its self.


*My point if you didn't get it = in my opinion, EVERYTHING, complicated or not, is just another aspect of nature and natural laws. Yes -even life, even you.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 07:52 PM

Justine asks:
"Does life currently have motivation?"

Life as an entity does not exist. It has not motivation, no lust, no love, no desire, it is just a word in a language used to describe something we can't even unequivocably define.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/19/06 10:59 PM

Life has about as much motivation as a oxygen atom has to bond with another oxygen atom.
Posted by: JohnK

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/23/06 08:04 AM

dkv has a very unique and different perception and his theory is worth giving a thought.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/23/06 05:55 PM

pfft!
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/24/06 01:46 AM

JohnK ... I've thought about dvk's unique and different perception. Gave it all the thought it was worthy of receiving ... just like the altered perceptions of my contemporaries back in the 60s. Ooh look ... pretty colours.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/24/06 08:04 PM

"... to deny the next Technological Fact."

Please see a therapist. Your have again crossed the line into irrationality.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/24/06 09:10 PM

"Every power has this habit and I dont blame them for this. But after knowing so much it will be very sad for our Scientists (whos gave us so much ) to deny the next Technological Fact."

Let's all try to help dkv instead of continuously telling him to seek help. He is obviously not taking our advice...

dkv,
How can a power have a habit?

Scientists discover technological facts, why would scientists deny the next technological fact?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/24/06 09:38 PM

Help him how? And I am serious. He does not seem to realize that much of what he writes is irrational.
The help he needs can be best given by a licensed therapist that can read through these threads and see what is so obvious. Words without a subject. Paragraph without content. Phrases without meaning.

If you have a better idea ... some way to convince him to seek the help he needs ... I'd like to hear it.
Posted by: JohnK

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 04:09 AM

Everbody has his own perception and if one has a a different one and you dont agree then you should tell it upfront or prove it wrong or you can simply ignore replying to that. DA Morgan and Rob should not forget that he should respect other's opinions. Saying such things that "please see a therapist" can be annoying. Things written by dkv are, for no reasons, taken personally.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 04:36 AM

"Things written by dkv are, for no reasons, taken personally."

Not personally. May I remind you that this is a Science discussion forum? DKV has made numerous posts that lack any basis in Science and show a very poor level of comprehension of English grammar and syntax. The umbrage taken is to the content, not the poster. In addition to breaking the rules of the forum, DKV now is engaged in importing his own private cheering section; first it was his girlfriend and now you. If you can't see how you are being used by him, you're as dim as he is. If and when one of DKV's comments is (a) on-topic and (b) relevant to Science I will let them stand. I refer you to the sign at the door, under the heading "Science Discussion Forum".
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 08:52 AM

Wow !! So much of trouble is not needed Rose.
Point the concpets which you think are unscientific and we will have a debate.
As far girl friend part is concerned I guess it was written in the context of Evolution.
Whatever was deleted,was deleted without any arguments in favour or in opposition.
The English argument has its limitations as what I define as good literature moves little beyond grammar.
Some noble souls dont believe in full stops.
I am waiting to hear where I went wrong.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 08:59 AM

"Some noble souls dont believe in full stops."

How funny is this?! smile
Posted by: JohnK

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 12:14 PM

May i clearify that it was a suggestion, not to you Rose, that we can have a healthy discussion without making rude comments on anybody.
On same lines, i have to tell you that whether you agree or not, there are replies that are direct comment on the poster. and also I am afraid to tell you that you failed to delete such comments if only relevent and on topic comments have to kept in here.
But, "DKV now is engaged in importing his own private cheering section"
shows how personally you too have taken it!
And, please explain me whether it is neccessary to have a good grammer and syntax knowledge etc to join this forum?
I am just another member whose interest is in physics and i find dkv's theory interesting if not correct. Please let us not make it an issue.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 01:15 PM

"please explain me whether it is neccessary to have a good grammer and syntax knowledge etc to join this forum?"

Well JohnK!! I,, believe do?! this that your QUEstion AnswerS?!!?!
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/25/06 06:03 PM

Necessarily so not thinks me.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/26/06 06:30 AM

Finally as always the barrier appears to be the Language. We have take it too seriously.Undoubtedly Language is the backbone of any civilization. But consider this - In a United Wrold do we really need an accurate answers from Grammar or do we follow the heart of the matter which transcends almost anything conceivably created by any one.
The giant Goliath of false reasoning may not always stand to loose but there are people who understand Universe as beyond the simple and stupid True and False.
Thats something we all understand today because you find me among you.
The light of awareness sheds your deepest fears and gives you the Field of Pure Unity. Unity of opposites.Tiger and the Lamb appear united as if they had no differences.Just like some countries having opposite philosophy come together to make profit.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/26/06 10:59 AM

English is apparently becoming the new Esperanto so you have no excuse, unless of course it's madness...
Posted by: JohnK

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/30/06 05:34 AM

"Well JohnK!! I,, believe do?! this that your QUEstion AnswerS?!!?! "
Well, Nothing wriiten by dkv is in such not-understandable form.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/30/06 05:54 AM

dvk needs a medical evaluation by a competent psychotherpist. He seemingly is incapable of realizing that the vast majority of his posts are irrational.

Unfortunately, in his situation, it is the rare person capable of seeing themselves as others do.

dvk: Please seek out the help of a psychiatrist.
Posted by: RM

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/30/06 12:27 PM

Stop, you'll brain-wash him.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 01/31/06 09:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dkv:
Now I found the Brain Washing sentiments.
Way off topic. Get yourself to a mad house.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 02/01/06 05:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dkv:
Who is in the Cage ?....
Please look up the meaning of the words "megalomaniac" and "schizophrenia".
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 02/03/06 05:16 AM

You ask what is irrational in the other thread. Look at the above. Is there a point? Is there a subject? Is there a coherent thought?

You wrote: "Please ask the individuals who are giving you those words to explain Singularity in Psychology."

What does this have to do with what anyone else has written?
What does it have to do with the word megalomaniac?
What does it have to do with the word schizophrenia?
Who said anyone gave Rose those words?


You ask "Is He the prize"
Where did the word "prize" come from?
To what in this thread does it refer?
To what in your post does "He" refer?

Post after post after post sees to drop out of nowhere ... no coherence ... no context ... no contact with objective reality. Please seek competent psychiatric support services.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 02/03/06 10:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dkv:
Post after post after post sees to drop out of nowhere ... no coherence ... no context ... no contact with objective reality. Please seek competent psychiatric support services.
REP: I am afraid of any Psychiatric counselling.. Infact I have reserved some questions for him. I am not getting an opportunity.
Now we're getting to the heart of the matter.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 02/07/06 11:22 AM

Hahah..
Yes indeed heart of the matter.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 12:25 AM

dvk wrote:
"And you wont believe in Christ without Crucifying him."

Didn't help did it?

The difference between the state of the world before the crucifixion and after.

War?
Disease?
Famine?
Torture?
Rape?
Human kindness?

You'd think it would have made some difference other than act as an invitation to incite more bloodshed and violence.

So another crucifixion? Hardly. Didn't do a damned bit of good which reminds me of a wonderful quote from Mr. Mason in the original movie Hannibal.

"God's choices in inflicting suffering are not satisfactory to us, nor are they understandable, unless innocence offends him. Clearly he needs some help in directing the blind fury with which he flogs the Earth."

You'd think a real deity would be capable of an action that was positive in its effect. So far we have one flood and a lot of blood.

Maybe we shouldn't think of god as dead but rather more as just being an abysmal failure.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 04:37 AM

Dan, quit playing with the trolls.

Regards,

Amaranth
Posted by: Beaker

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 08:24 PM

If god exists then you?ve really got to think that he's probably a bit pissed at the lot of us. He pops down in the form of his son to take a gander at how we're doing and some pillock goes and nails him to a couple of 4 by 2s and leaves him up there all day. I know I?d be less than pleased. He was pretty rathful in the old testament and then nice and happy and loving in the new, probably right up until the crown of thorns, but then it was too late for a re-wirte.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 09:24 PM

Rose ... quit letting the trolls post.

Simple. Elegant. Efficient.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 09:30 PM

Beaker wrote:
"If god exists then you?ve really got to think that he's probably a bit pissed at the lot of us."

Not at all. The only one he has any right to be angry with is himself. He created the mess. He should be mature enough to accept personal responsibility: Not act like a spoiled 2 year old. Whose fault is it when a trained attack dog attacks?

Beaker wrote:
"He pops down in the form of his son to take a gander at how we're doing and some pillock goes and nails him to a couple of 4 by 2s and leaves him up there all day."

And were it him I'd say it was damned well deserved. He didn't have to create us this way. It was a matter of choice. Back when there were only two of us, to use the biblical inanity, he knew there was a problem (just ask the snake). That was the time to take corrective action.

Beaker wrote:
"I know I?d be less than pleased."

But then you are one of the imperfect results of creation so your feelings are irrelevant.

Beaker wrote:
"He was pretty rathful in the old testament and then nice and happy and loving in the new"

He was incompetent blundering and egotistical in the old and nothing has changed in the new. Perhaps you need to read the final chapters. He is still egotistical and bloody minded.

Beaker wrote:
"nd loving in the new, probably right up until the crown of thorns"

Who broke his magic wand? If he didn't want the crown of thorns he should have turned the place into a cinder. So this nonsense about suffering is just pathetic garbage. If you have the power to vaporize a planet then a bunch of Romans are hardly going to be running around with kryptonite.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/02/06 09:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Rose ... quit letting the trolls post.

Simple. Elegant. Efficient.
That's not my call to make. Talk to Kate about that. I only moderate. Banning is the purview of my chief.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/03/06 01:54 AM

Kate ... how about it?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/03/06 02:37 PM

Beaker wrote:
"If god exists then you?ve really got to think that he's probably a bit pissed at the lot of us."
REP: Quite Possible.
==============================================
Not at all. The only one he has any right to be angry with is himself.
REP: You talk as if you are seperate from HIM.
===============================================
He created the mess. He should be mature enough to accept personal responsibility: Not act like a spoiled 2 year old. Whose fault is it when a trained attack dog attacks?
REP: He created much more than that... open up your eyes and you will see Him everywhere.
==========================================
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/03/06 09:00 PM

dkv wrote:
"You talk as if you are seperate from HIM."

Perhaps you haven't notice the tenants of your own religion ... but he drowns people. That indicates a substantial degree of separation. If he drowned himself that would be first step in the right direction.

dkv wrote:
"He created much more than that... open up your eyes and you will see Him everywhere."

I did and I do. I see him in the cancer ward at the Fred Hutch killing innocent children. I see him in the DNA core of smallpox. I see him in every 7+ magnitude earthquake. I see him in the tsunami that killed a quarter-of-a-million people in Asia.

I know you see him in the miraculous recovery of someone in an auto accident and forget allowed the accident to happen. Just brush away the miracles of modern medicine, all discovered, without any help from the deity du jour.

Your GOD is a FRAUD!
A liar.
A hypocrite.
A hot blooded genocidal maniac.
A creator of death and destruction on an unprecedented scale.

You worship pure unadulterated evil while trying to subvert others to do the same. So yes I do like to feel a wide degree of separation from you and your kind.
Posted by: Beaker

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/03/06 09:22 PM

DA, you seem to consider god alot even though you claim to disbelieve inhim. to be this suggegests a lapsed believer. How about it? Did you ever believe or were you raised in the church?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/04/06 03:48 AM

All the adjective my dear Moragn used can be applied to all the leaders of the world...
You can not tranfer your byproduct to a temple...
which remains pure and hygenic.
If you are searching for the Truth then the truth has already been told to you. It is Blunt.
We are living like a frog in a well.
God intentions are as holy as your definition of Honesty.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/04/06 05:34 AM

Beaker wrote:
"to be this suggegests a lapsed believer."

Never, in my life, have I smoked a single cigarette.
Never, in my adult life, have I believed in anything that didn't meet the criteria of science.

Raised in an environment where I was taken to church until age 12 and then treated like an adult ... allowed to make up my own mind. And I had one.

Since then I have taken comparative religion classes at university, read a lot of theology and philosophy. And I still come back to the same thing. I reject cocaine and heroin in my life because they are addictive and just make you feel good for a short time. Pretty much the same reason I reject all religions. The difference being only that one I can more easily discard. There are fewer drug pushers than theology pushers. But they are all equally evil. All trying to make money by subverting intelligence and common sense.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/04/06 05:44 AM

dvk wrote:
"All the adjective my dear Moragn used can be applied to all the leaders of the world..."

Absolutely true. So why don't you get on your knees and pray to Levy Mwanawasa? Perhaps because as evil as he is he never created smallpox and never gave a child leukemia.

dvk wrote:
"You can not tranfer your byproduct to a temple...
which remains pure and hygenic."

Temple? I said nothing about a temple. I want to lying hypocritical genocidal maniac to face me man-to-man.

dvk wrote:
"If you are searching for the Truth then the truth has already been told to you. It is Blunt."

Truth is verifiable. Truth doesn't hide behind burning bushes, anonymous books, secret conferences, and commit wholesale genocidal murder. The truth to which you refer is the truth of 1984 and George Orwell.

dvk wrote:
"We are living like a frog in a well."

You are perhaps. Speak for yourself. You know nothing of me and my life. I don't dwell in your darkness.

dvk wrote:
"God intentions are as holy as your definition of Honesty."

So when he murdered everyone on the planet that was holiness?

So when he murdered every first born male in a country that was holiness?

So when he created smallpox, rabies, leukemia, AIDS, polio, typhoid, malaria that was holiness.

Now I understand why those who believe in him have such a love of bloodsheed and holy water. They can't tell the two apart.

You really should seek professional counseling.
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/05/06 08:28 PM

Poor DA, having to fend off the blind all by yourself.

At least they haven't pulled the infamous free will card on you.

" We chose to eat the apple and therefore doomed humanity to this hellish existence..."

My response to that has always been, God is like an immature control freak parent which only thinks you are worth anything when you follow his way of thinking completely.

Give it up guys, if you believe in God and Satan then you must see that Satan won the bet and God really doesn't care about it, he is probably out creating other worlds populated with mindless idiots since that is what he wants from his followers. The only things Lucifer got punished for was asking a simple question, falling in love with humans ( depending on what you read) and stating the simple fact and God sentenced him to hell for it.

IS this a loving father figure or an evil, megolomanical person? If God had been a real person we would have declared him an unfit parent and locked him up for child abuse: i.e. allowing his son to be tortured and killed to prove some obscure point.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 04:39 AM

Chaos wrote:
"At least they haven't pulled the infamous free will card on you."

If they do they'll be having a proctologist recover it for them: Perhaps they sense that.

You are correc though. Their concept of a loving god/father is a merciless vengeful control freak. And one with one heck of a need to be overtly worshipped Sort of the ultimate school-yard bully.

And you are correct ... if there really is a God and Satan then there is no question who is in control. Only Satan could lead so many into the wholesale slaughter, bloodshed, and torture used by all of the major religions.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 12:24 PM

Chaoslillith,

If I had the same simplistic understanding of theology as you then I would probably draw the same conclusions, but I have taken the time to understand monotheistic religions a little better.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 12:27 PM

IS this a loving father figure or an evil, megolomanical person?

Neither - He is a god and the Bible recognises that we can barely grasp at what he is really like so it constantly talks in symbols and the nearest thing that we can understand.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 12:29 PM

"God is like an immature control freak parent "

- If that was so, you would have the freedom to do nothing - but instead you have been given the freedom to do as you please - there are just consequences. As there are consequences for the whole of humanity if we continue as we are and make this planet uninhabitable for future generations.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 12:40 PM

"Only Satan could lead so many into the wholesale slaughter, bloodshed, and torture used by all of the major religions."

- Considering that throughout history, the majority of humanity have believed in gods and have been responsible for the minority of wars. Most wars are secular in nature. In fact by far the most bloodshed has nothing at all to do with religion.

Religion is abused in all sorts of ways and used as an excuse to war with others, but the basis of the Christian faith is very clear - 'love your enemies' and 'serve others needs instead of your own' and I can keep trotting them out. Because religion (like anything else) can be abused, it does not follow that religion is inherently destructive.

How are the non-religious doing? How many Christians do I know who give up everything and serve others? Many. The quiet revolution that you will never hear about because they are told to 'do what you do privately, seeking no reward'.

Do not for one moment think you understand Christianity. You only hear and see the minority of loud and violent people who have wilfully ignored the message at the heart of Christianity. You do not see the millions who just go about their business, doing good.

It's easy to sit where you are and criticize Christianity, but it is a good deal nearer the solution to human problems than anything else is. It is the only real religion that deals with an internal struggle to overcome selfishness and do what is best for others, the community and the world as a whole.

DA, you have asked why I reject all other religions. The answer is that Christianity is the only one that deals with the heart of the issue. All other religions and ideologies are either wishy-washy feel good rubbish that have no real application to the real world, or they are like Islam which is all about an external struggle. Christianity is the only one with the central idea that on our own we just cannot do the right thing, but all other religions pander to the idea that we can do it ourselves and earn our way into heaven.

Does anyone want to stand up for the idea that the human race can get it right on its own?

Since the UK has thrown off the ?shackles? of Christianity, we have lurched from one social disaster to another, and from one low to another. Let?s have a Guiness Book of Records for that ? youngest teen mum (in fact forget the word ?teen?), the youngest child murderer, the youngest child to rape a teacher (currently 12). The annual amount of children who lose their virginity when drunk - the annual amount of teen pregnancies/abortions. Youngest person using drugs. Worst ?happy slapping? ? the highest amount of children sedated with Ritalin. The book would run and run. So what teaches moral responsibility in the place of Christianity today? ? well in the UK we have a rather noticeable gap, and I can?t see it being filled anytime soon.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 01:33 PM

Actually Black I have no problems with the message behind the religion. It's the fact that organized religion gives humans a huge amount of ground to justify things such as the crusades, racism, the whole Middle East conflict ( pick one conflict there are so many), witch burnings, torture, extermination of races (Native Americans for one) and the list goes on. I am just against any form of organized religion because it is a guarantee that someone will twist it to their own purposes.

I was raised Catholic, I have listened to the scripture over and over and to be quite honest I found it quite interesting how people overlooked certain things throughout history. Many times it was the heathens that were living according to what Christ taught but historically the "heathens" were destroyed because they were not Christian.

I take a bit of offense to you stating that only "Christians" do good works for no rewards. I know a lot of people who volunteer and help those not as fortunate and many of them have left the church because they could not stand the hypocrisy of those in it.

Religion can be wonderful and it can be the most destructive force in the world. By the way most of the major wars used some point in religion to justify them, even Hitler did.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 07:51 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"If I had the same simplistic understanding of theology as you then I would probably draw the same conclusions, but I have taken the time to understand monotheistic religions a little better."

Insulting and without substance to substantiate that you know anything of Chaos's understanding of monotheistic religion. I expected better than this.
Perhaps an apology is in order.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 07:53 PM

Blacknad wrote:
IS this a loving father figure or an evil, megolomanical person?

Neither - He is a god and the Bible recognises that we can barely grasp at what he is really like so it constantly talks in symbols and the nearest thing that we can understand.

Nonsense Blacknad. I can clearly and easily grasp and comprehend a world-wide flood killing innocent children. I can also comprehend the murder of every first-born male in an entire country. Not to mention smallpox, AIDS, leukemia, polio and a host of other inventions of said deity.

If there is some aspect of smallpox I can not grasp then that fault clearly lies with the creator of both me and smallpox doesn't it?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 08:21 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"- Considering that throughout history, the majority of humanity have believed in gods and have been responsible for the minority of wars. Most wars are secular in nature. In fact by far the most bloodshed has nothing at all to do with religion."

A nice fairy tale but history does not support it.
Try these on for size:

First Crusade 1096-1099
People's Crusade 1096
German Crusade 1096
Minor Crusade 1101
Second Crusade 1145-1187
Third Crusade 1189-1192
Fourth Crusade 1202-1204
Albigensian Crusade 1209-1229
Children's Crusade 1212
Fifth Crusade 1217-1221
Sixth Crusade 1228-1244
Seventh Crusade 1248-1254
1st Shepherd's Crusade 1251
Eighth Crusade 1270
Ninth Crusade 1269-1291
2nd Shepherd's Crusade 1320
Northern Crusades 1193-1410
The War of the Roses 1455-1485
The French Wars of Religion 1562-1598

And these are just off the top of my head. Want me to see some real research.

"Most wars were secular?" Hardly. That is a fabrication so easily challenged I am amazed you put it into play. The reality of the Christian Church is that it is soaked in blood and that bloodshed continues to almost this very day in Northern Ireland where the Catholics and Protestants are at each others throats.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 09:07 PM

Chaoslillith said - "It's the fact that organized religion gives humans a huge amount of ground to justify things such as the crusades, racism, the whole Middle East conflict ( pick one conflict there are so many), witch burnings, torture, extermination of races (Native Americans for one) and the list goes on."

REP: Couldn't agree more. However the current Middle East conflict with the West is more to do with Western interference in the Middle East esp. American. For example, the USA support of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The USA was happy to go into Kuwait when that was occupied, but is happy to support Israel to the tune of $134,791,507,200 so far.

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm


Chaoslillith said ? ?I am just against any form of organized religion because it is a guarantee that someone will twist it to their own purposes.?

REP: Couldn?t agree more. Organised Christian religions especially make a nonsense of the central message of Christ. Christianity is about individuals striving to deal with their selfishness, and church is a place where they meet to have fellowship and learn together, not to hatch evil plots to exert themselves on the rest of society. It is not about politics, enforcement or power. In fact, we are urged to put down power and take up servant hood.

Chaoslillith said ? ?Many times it was the heathens that were living according to what Christ taught but historically the "heathens" were destroyed because they were not Christian.?

REP: I agree with the first part ? Christianity does not have the monopoly on good living and is often shamed by non-believers. The church is full of dodgy people who are there because they especially realise their need for God. It does not surprise me, though it saddens me, that the church has so many sexual offenders esp. paedophiles. I will not defend organised religion when it has lost it and attacked heathens. When God chose to destroy a race it was usually because they were indulging in practises that were base in the extreme. Sacrificing children ?walking the fire? was a common practice amongst races that the Israelites were commanded to destroy. They were not blameless.

Chaoslillith said ? ?I take a bit of offense to you stating that only "Christians" do good works for no rewards. I know a lot of people who volunteer and help those not as fortunate and many of them have left the church because they could not stand the hypocrisy of those in it.?

REP: I understand why, and I would be a fool to say that non-believers do not do extraordinary good acts. The point was about where humanity naturally leads itself, and that seems to be towards the self indulgent lifestyle. TV attests to it, consumerism attests to it ? the amount we spend entertaining ourselves in terms of time and money is absolutely obscene when paralleled with those who exist in the two-thirds world who die from starvation. And it is also that I have seen many of my Christian friends just give up everything and sell everything to go and assist in a third world country. I just don?t personally know any non believer who has done the same (given up everything), except maybe take a gap year as a teen and volunteer somewhere and then come back to the fold ? I am not saying there aren?t any, but I have not met them. It?s just a question of percentages ? Christians are much more likely to do it. I don?t mean to offend you.

Chaoslillith said ? ?Religion can be wonderful and it can be the most destructive force in the world. By the way most of the major wars used some point in religion to justify them, even Hitler did.?

REP: I agree with both parts of your first sentence, but as for the second part ? I am sorry to be so blunt, but you demonstrate an ignorance of world history.

Hitler was driven by an atheist ideology. ?One historian has called it the reductio ad absurdum of the German tradition of nationalism, militarism, worship of success, and force, as well as the exaltation of state.?

He did not allude to religion in any way whatsoever.

And the point remains that Atheists win hands down when it comes to bloodshed. Vox Day puts it well:

?Who has not heard the Catholic Spanish Inquisition, (2,000 death sentences passed on to the Spanish Crown over 349 years) conflated with the pagan Holocaust (12 million murders in five years), and the atheist slaughters of the Great Terror, the Great Leap Forward and the Killing Fields. (4 million murders in 20 years, 30 million murders in 3 years and 2 million murders in four years, respectively.) And it is commonly asserted that religion is a major cause of war, although, as I have previously demonstrated, religion has only played a role in about 10 percent of all the wars in recorded history.?

?A more systematic review of the 489 wars listed in the Wikipedia's list of military conflicts, ranging from Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars to the 1969 Football War between Honduras and El Salvador, shows that only 53 of these wars - 10.8 percent - can reasonably be described as having a religious nature, even if one counts each of the 10 Crusades separately. If there is a god responsible for this ever-present bloodshed, it is Mars, not Jehovah or Jesus Christ.?


The myth that religion is the major cause of war is propagated by those ignorant of history.

If Christianity was ever put on trial it would be found without doubt to have propagated more good than harm. It is only those who have a shallow understanding and distorted view of it that think otherwise.


Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 09:20 PM

Dan wrote - "Insulting and without substance to substantiate that you know anything of Chaos's understanding of monotheistic religion. I expected better than this.
Perhaps an apology is in order."

REP: I don't know why, but I'm in quite a bullish mood - wouldn't normally be that harsh.

But on the basis of Chaos' post that I was responding to, I stand by my words.

He sets up straw men.

The biblical understanding of Lucifer's fall is more complex than Chaos suggests. It was not just for asking a question or falling in love with humans.

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 09:23 PM

Dan wrote - "And these are just off the top of my head. Want me to see some real research."

REP: Look Dan, I know your brain is better than most others and certainly sharper than mine, but never-the-less, I don't believe for one moment that they were all off the top of your head, complete with dates. smile

Blacknad.
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 09:25 PM

I said that religion was used as a justification, not the true cause of the wars. The Inquisition and the like were about power, money and politics but it was nicely wrapped in a religious package, same with the crusades etc. when politicians need a handy rallying cry it is either for God or Country that we go and die for.

I will concede that the Middle East conflicts have roots in Western intereference yet I must point out that it tends to be based in some part on religion. We are the Great Satan who is an infidel and therfore must be destroyed, the Jews want their homeland in the country where their religion was started, the Muslims hate Muslims that do not practice the same way. Yes, at it's core it is about power but how much harder is it to inflame the masses using the following justification: "Kill them because (insert leader name here) want their land." It works to some degree but not as well as "Kill them because our God commands it", or my personal favorite "We must kill them to save them from their heathen ways so they may have a chance in heaven." Errrr???
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 09:28 PM

Just to clairfy, I am a she not a he.No worries though.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 10:40 PM

Can you believe it? I did the exact same thing as you did with Dan smile

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 11:24 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"However the current Middle East conflict with the West is more to do with Western interference in the Middle East esp. American. ... For example, the USA support of the Israeli occupation of Palestine."

Actually this is not true. There was a great paper published in Foreign Relations back in, I believe, the late 80s predicting this culture clash. If Israel had never existed the current situation would not be far different.

So now that you've agreed with everything Chaos said ... care to reread what you originally wrote?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/06/06 11:31 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"He sets up straw men."

So much for turning the other cheek eh! ;-)

"The biblical understanding of Lucifer's fall is more complex than Chaos suggests. It was not just for asking a question or falling in love with humans."

No ... that is more a description of the fall of humans isn't it. We got it in the gut for asking questions and falling in love.

Blacknad wrote:
"I don't believe for one moment that they were all off the top of your head, complete with dates. [Smile]"

You are correct ... I looked up the dates in Wikipedia. But my challenge still stands. Any time you'd like to look at the bloodbath visited upon humanity by organized religions I'd be happy to oblige you. Perhaps you should start with the reason why a couple of Henry XIII's wives lost their heads ... Protestants vs Catholics. Visit Great Britain some time and visit the National Trust properties. Find out the origin of the word "Priest Hole." You've a lot to learn of the "love" generated by a crucifixion.

But it is amazing Blacknad that you couldn't identify lillith as female. I was actually rather flattered by her assuming my gender to be other than it is.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Lillith.html

Better get back to your bible and read it a bit more closely. The atheists are catching up with you.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/07/06 10:03 AM

Hey - there's nothing wrong with a robust discussion. I have not slighted Chaos as a person. In fact from her posts so far she seems very nice.

I don't want to sound all defensive and trekky, but how dare you accuse me of not being aware of Lillith - she's off Frasier wink

It was the Chaos bit that threw me. Sounded all manly. But if I thought Chaos was a man, I thought he was probably a very effeminate one who was intimately in touch with his female side.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/07/06 12:22 PM

DA,

I am flattered that you are flattered by my assuming you were female. Now that the ego stroking is complete smile . I do love the character of Lillith on Frasier because she could change so completely from Professional to Seductress it was wonderful. She did not do it often enough on either Fraiser or Cheers though.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/07/06 08:30 PM

Blacknad wrote:
"I have not slighted Chaos as a person."

Perhaps you missed the following that you wrote:

"If I had the same simplistic understanding of theology as you then ...."

If that isn't slighting someone then I need a refresher course in civility. Well actually I do but not for that reason.

Blacknad wrote:
"It was the Chaos bit that threw me. Sounded all manly."

I'm going to let this one just hang there though I might recommend a refresher course in Women's Lib.

Lillith:
As Robert Heinlein said:
"Whenever women have insisted on absolute equality with men, they have invariably wound up with the dirty end of the stick. What they are and what they can do makes them superior to men, and their proper tactic is to demand special privileges, all the traffic will bear. They should never settle merely for equality. For women, "equality" is a disaster."
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/08/06 02:24 PM

DA,
If you were not already spoken for I would definitely want your number!!

(sigh, a man who gets it) smile
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/08/06 02:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Chaoslillith:
DA,
If you were not already spoken for I would definitely want your number!!

(sigh, a man who gets it) smile
Is there some science in this remark? Please remember this is a science forum, not a dating service.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/08/06 10:54 PM

Chaoslillith wrote:
"If you were not already spoken for ...."

Not to be misintepreted ... my wife passed away from cancer in 1993.

And yes Rose there is science in it. What Lillith was alluding to was the following studies on oxytocin and prolactin.

http://www.oxytocin.org/oxytoc
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~rjh9u/oxytocin.html

Apparently the links didn't make it into her post.

BTW: Since when does recognizing a man's ability to put the toilet seat down equate with dating? No doubt Lillith has far more demanding standards. ;-)
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/13/06 12:11 PM

I am sorry for your loss.

I lost my dad to cancer in 97.

I never meant to make this a dating service, just a bit of humor that's all.

As far as my standards, it depends on which of my friends you talk to (hehe).
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/13/06 08:42 PM

Lillith wrote:
"I never meant to make this a dating service, just a bit of humor that's all."

You didn't and I didn't. But an English chav named blacknad did.

If he buys me a some decent suds in May all will be forgiven (at least by me).

Hopefully your standards are both as high, and as low, as meet your needs.

Not to inimate anything about you but this does remind me of another Heinlein quote:
"Women will forgive anything. Otherwise, the race would have died out long ago."

Which is really a statement about biology which is science which keeps this thread as 'on-track' as the rest of what is tolerated here as discourse.

How about that prolactin?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/14/06 12:16 AM

Chav? Me?

I was only jesting - am I the only one that gets lambasted for trying to join in the fun?

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/14/06 08:11 AM

Of course not Blacknad. But I've been trying to find an opportunity to try out these new English words to see how they resonate.

I tried 'lovely' but it just dosen't roll off an American's tongue.
Posted by: Chaoslillith

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/14/06 12:07 PM

It does if you pronounce it a la "My Fair Lady" style...lov -e -ly. When all else fails, add syllables!!

Umm...how is this scientific, well linguists tell us that language defines what makes humans more advanced then animals so......there.

(smirk)
Posted by: rlb60123

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/15/06 10:53 PM

Dear DA

DA Said...
And that why can only be answered in one of three ways:
1. Your god didn't know penicillin existed.
2. Your god knew about penicillin and kept secret.
3. Your god doesn't exist.

You tell me ... which of these 3 you believe. It is, after all, your personal god.

Speaking for myself ... if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3.

my answer....
You sound like you Hate God. To have an emotion regarding what you consider nonexistant takes a lot of energy that you shouldn't be wasting.

If you don't find God, that is your fault not God's. It isn't my job to prove God exists, it is only my job to Seek whether he does or not.
All fresh dies, why? When you read about Genocide in the Bible, you have to be specific.

In my world there is Faith that God exists and evidence that Man is Foulable. You show me where man is infoulable and I will show you evidence of God.

I think to much I think
rlb60123
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/16/06 12:48 AM

Dan wrote - "I tried 'lovely' but it just doesn't roll off an American's tongue."

- I'm sure you did smile

And nothing roles of an American's tongue half as well as 'Can you supersize that?' or maybe I'm tarring all Americans with the same brush, just as some people do with us nutty Christians wink

BTW, call me a stoopid Bible-Bashing fundie bigoted Xian nut job, just please don't call me a chav.

Blacknad.
Posted by: rlb60123

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/16/06 01:45 AM

Dear Chaos,

You said...

I am just against any form of organized religion because it is a guarantee that someone will twist it to their own purposes.

Read Hosea Chapter 8... God is against Organized Religion aswell.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/16/06 07:13 AM

What is organized?
Organized is understood part of normal events happening daily in our lives.It can be linear and non-linear.Please note both can be "understood".
Who is the owner of it?(or who explains the things as it is) is a much more interesting question.
Make the Supreme Consciousness responsible for it and you get the the Universe and religion.
Make the Science responsible for it and you get the little less than that.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/16/06 07:28 AM

rlb60123 wrote:
" if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3."

As you point out ... it is the only reasonable choice.

Blacknad wrote:
BTW, call me a stoopid Bible-Bashing fundie bigoted Xian nut job, just please don't call me a chav."

Ok. You are a reasonably intelligent subject of parental brainwashing who, every time he gets close to using his mind for logical thinking, recoils in horror at the implication thereof.

If you were stoooopid I'd just ignore you.

Happy?

rlb60123 wrote:
"God is against Organized Religion as well."

Apparently I misjudged you from your original post(s). My apology. You are absolutely correct. But heck anyone willing to intentionally rewrite the Ten Commandments, and pick and choose who to stone to death ... adulterers or homosexuals? Hmmm! Decisions Decisions. Should have no problem ignoring other inconvenient parts of a book.

And dvk ... maintaining a his perfect record of incomprehensible babble wrote:
"What is organized?"

So now you are going to try to lawyer your way out of it? Gee ... how about stoning adulterers? I guess that depends on what an adulterer is. Or the prohibition against murder. Lets call in some attorneys and draw fine distinctions between murder, killing, and manslaughter.

dvk stop trying to be the poster child for the shallow end of the gene pool and get yourself some counselling.
Posted by: rlb60123

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 03/21/06 06:02 PM

Dear all,

rlb60123 wrote:
" if (1) Then god didn't create it ... if (2) god is a genocidal maniac filled with hate and malice. Thus I choose 3."

I didn't write this I quoted DA. Going to start putting quotations around those I quote to end confusion. Totally my fault sorry.

Respectfully rlb60123
I think to much I think
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/06/06 09:09 PM

Wow!
This stuff is too ddep for the Origins Board!?
jjw
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/06/06 10:15 PM

Jim

I may be in deep water, but I think there's another choice available. God is as bemused by us as we are by him,or her or it. Having set the universe in motion and let it run, it came up with us. How do we know that animals are not self aware? A horse is a pretty intelligent creature, they can find their way out of their stall with just their teeth and lips sometimes. How do we know that horses do not have religion? what do they think about when standing in the sunlight? They must be thinking of something, I think, they have brains that work for problem solving so they're not brain-dead. What goes on in a horse's brain is anyone's guess but I think they're not thinking about the next meal all the time. What would a horse think about religion? Is there an equine equivalent of God? I've always wondered that, but I suppose I'll never know.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/07/06 12:46 AM

Rose suggests:
"but I think there's another choice available."

Rose there are a nearly infinite number of possible choices. But what is critical is that to validate extant religions those choices must be in line with the theological teachings.

The invisible purple rhinoceros is inconsistent with Judiasm, Islam, and Christianity so it is not a reasonable explanation. It does, however, make a great foil for pointing out that if you choose faith over reason ... then faith in one nonsense is a valuable as faith in any nonsense.

Limit the choices of what a deity must be like to comply with the requirements of the three middle-eastern religions and you end up with very little wiggle-room unless you sacrifice integrity as do most/all of our current crop of theologians.
Posted by: dehammer

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/10/06 05:56 AM

personally, i believe we must all find our own path to the truths that we are ready to understand. no one may walk your path, as they cant see it and it is not theirs. you cant walk theirs as it is not visible to you.

there is a saying something about not trying to tell me my path, as you cant see it. don't try to follow as its not yours. don't try to lead me down your path as its not mine.

I'm not sure if i said that exactly right but that the gist of it.

i was once a christian, but got into trouble for asking questions when the answers were always, "have faith". i never was good at "have faith" when its someone else's faith i had to have.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/20/06 06:09 AM

Since the question of faith has been on the Mankind's agenda for centuries now.
I wonder how can dehammer claim to have lost his wonderful associative reflexivity to deep faith.
Its just that faith has shifted to a new but incomplete paradigm of thought and action.
Yes it is true that there are multiple paths and equally true is the fact that every path has its own characteristic defintion of good and bad. But interestingly all lead to the same jungle of peace or ocean or conciousness..
It is important to respect all but it is equally important to know what is suitable for you because you are unique.
We are living a dream ...and we just need a good reason to liberate.Choose any but with good faith.So keep the faith.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/20/06 06:22 PM

DKV:
You are SO off topic. Please remember this is a Science forum and do try to keep your comments in line with that. I can't make heads or tails of your remarks about "same jungle of peace or ocean or conciousness.. " and I'm sure many others out there are wondering also. Stick to the Science of things, please. We have enough wandering off course without your twisted, convoluted and off-the-wall remarks adding to the confusion.
Posted by: Philege

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/20/06 09:46 PM

Sorry DKV, it looks like it's your turn to be persecuted!
Posted by: Justine

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/22/06 03:30 PM

I like what you said, DKV, and I like what dehammer said, too. You are both exactly on target smile
Posted by: jjw

Re: Adam, Eve and Me - 05/23/06 12:03 AM

Topic: Adam, Eve and me.

There is little doubt that some people are not comfortable with just accepting things as we find them. Our nature is to seek reasons for everything and in the process we invent stuff. God participation came along way before science and because it has been around longer it has become well established. The response of science, ?the Big Bang?, which if fact is described as not a ?Bang? at all is the modern answer for what was attributed to God originally. When I moved away from formal religion and went towards reincarnation I suspected that for there to be reincarnation some ?thing? must be in control, but why? A flower grows and blooms with no apparent outside guidance, all it requires are nature?s basics. Why could not Adam, Eve and us all be part of a cycle that is self-perpetuating. We, all of animals, insects and us do our individual things like automations and could even possibly be recycled to try it all over again.

Both Science and Religion assume the existence of free will and, to me, that is a point at issue. The more alternatives you can envision appear to support more choices for the exercise of free will. I do not advocate Fate in control. I do wonder at how little free will actually exists in the course of our many decisions.
jjw