I do some pretty amazing texts in the bible if you forget the time line and accuracy. I do see a fairly close depiction of the big bang theory,, If you were trying to explain it to primitive man with knowledge of science. I also see the value to beliefs as they can provide an anchor of reason and stability when there is none and that is a hard place to be.
I do think in today's world there is little to no real transparency as it would be more like swimming in a muddy river.. especially when people do not want you to know about their activities like in the political deals and the massive bribes they are accepting.. that includes the business world.. it seems bribery has become a way of life.. But what do yu expect from a culture that worships the "Golden Calf" Allan On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 7:37 AM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > The old joke runs - 'I was a Catholic (perm to choice) until I reached > the age of reason'. Most religions have some notion of evolutionary > adaptation to the modern world in their creed, often at laughable odds > with practice. I'm in favour of a fresh start - yet how often have we > heard this from politicians really plotting business-as-usual? Those > who insist on holy text seem to miss the point that they make such > text into an idol to worship. As you point out Allan, the 'origin' of > such text is usually dubious, with the ideas already encoded in other > history and copied. There is some good stuff, but also evil rot like > Numbers 31 (and people about who will defend Moses as 'a man of his > time' - so was Hitler). > > We have new potentials for transparency these days - but even this is > contentious - most of us don't think much of eavesdropping and its > excesses from the Domesday Book through the Checkists, KGB, Gestapo, > Stasi and various secret services, offshore banking and witch-hunts. > Religious institutions have played their part in such. Was that a > police helicopter hovering above our estate a few minutes ago or part > of the Gabby-Matrix surveillance through which she intends to rule the > world? Just my way of asking what might be good in transparency, bad > or just paranoia. I'm quite sure Gabby's drones are much more stocked- > out with vorsprung dorch tecknik and stealth than the simple > instruments of our boys in blue! Religion often practices control of > our inner worlds through such matters as making masturbation a mortal > sin, weird rites like 'churching' and promises of judgement days and > after-life. Most who contribute in here seem interested in a more > rational form of spirituality - the first rational step for me in this > is imagining what this might be - especially as much presented as > rational is merely a systemic control fraud in which we are sheep in a > world in which 'aliens' own the grass. > > On Dec 6, 7:21 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think that religion should evolve..just like the rest of the >> universe.. when the evolution stops it begins to die.. a good example >> of dead beliefs is those our fundamentalist friend is presenting. >> Recite the magickal incantation and and every thing will be all >> right.. this statement to me is one of a dead faith' >> Allan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 6:31 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Biology is describing a 'co-evolution arms race'. Religious notions >> > of the eternal have a lot in common with Popper's 'World 3' and what >> > we can regard as 'objective' and 'factual' I'm as sure as you about >> > the 'meanness' you often describe and believe the way through it, past >> > it, whatever - is spiritual - maybe a kind of dawning. >> >> > There's a joke in the new Batman film (other 2 hours plus rubbish) - >> > when the bad guys raid the stock exchange a trader says there is no >> > money there for them to steal - the answer is that there must be - >> > otherwise the traders wouldn't be there. I think economics is largely >> > a fetish designed around libidinal and domination 'needs' - but even >> > organised religion becomes such. My guess is we need a spiritual >> > democracy and finance is set against this forcing us into compliance >> > with its control fraud much as many routinely bend their knees in >> > religious observance. Science, admittedly as reliably as a double- >> > glazing salesman, is suggesting human-biological intelligence is >> > already giving way to more machine-substrates that offer quasi- >> > immortality and intellect beyond a singularity we can hardly imagine. >> > In my science fiction dreaming we may discover the alien life on Earth >> > is actually ours and we have only been used by another, more worthy >> > consciousness.. >> >> > On 6 Dec, 12:26, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Many things are best guesses.. are the foundation to many things along >> >> what has been observed .. and there is nothing wrong with that .. many >> >> ideas have evolved from the instinct for survival .. from that has come >> >> selfishness which has lead to the excessive uncaring greed we see today... >> >> sacrificing the other ant. >> >> Allan >> >> >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light >> >> On Dec 6, 2012 11:09 AM, "archytas" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > Sounds like something Pontius Pilate might have used. >> >> >> > I guess that David Deutsch and constructor theory tries to get back to >> >> > reminding science about its root guesses Allan. I take from >> >> > 'Spartacus Ants' sacrificing themselves to destroy slaver ants that >> >> > pre-human biology 'knows' something of survival instinct. >> >> >> > Descartes had it that until we could get to a point of re-evaluating >> >> > against his radical doubt one had to trust in a beneficent god. >> >> > Whilst we can criticize his system, I think anti-religious science >> >> > misses the beat on issues of how we can live until we know more. The >> >> > spiritual thus has its place. There is plenty to avoid in its history >> >> > of control fraud, abuse, sexism and war crimes - but plenty to learn >> >> > in terms of grace and fellowship. >> >> >> > On 6 Dec, 08:15, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > it is not for cleaning hands ,, it just gets rid of smell that you >> >> > > can not get rid of no matter how much you wash.. you just wash after >> >> > > youor hands are clean,, then the smell is gone. >> >> > > Allan >> >> >> > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:27 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > > Hm, I have never thought of using a steel soap bar for cleaning my >> >> > hands. I >> >> > > > use it occasionally for my pots and pans. And for the more difficult >> >> > dirt on >> >> > > > my hands I use a pumice stone or lemon. And more and more often I >> >> > > > wear >> >> > > > gloves or buy frozen and precut garlic and onion. But thanks for the >> >> > tip. >> >> > > > I'm sure that one day I'll make use of it. Why not steel instead of >> >> > stone, >> >> > > > you're right. >> >> >> > > > On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 7:54:42 PM UTC+1, Allan Heretic wrote: >> >> >> > > >> Well actually Gabby I have this stainless steel soap bar used for >> >> > > >> getting rid of ordure off your hands things like onion, Garlic ,, >> >> > > >> any strong ordure ,, just tried it on the epoxy smell left over >> >> > > >> from >> >> > > >> fixing my maxi egg coddler. >> >> >> > > >> now one of the greatest mysteries of the universe,, how does it >> >> > > >> work? >> >> > > >> Allan >> >> >> > > >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:38 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> >> >> > > >> wrote: >> >> > > >> > The pointlessness of the points' business. Like Lee, I find the >> >> > > >> > God >> >> > > >> > concept >> >> > > >> > much more to the point. :) >> >> >> > > >> > I don't follow Lee's sequencing model - first spirit, then >> >> > > >> > matter - >> >> > > >> > though. >> >> > > >> > This sounds very man-made to me. ;) >> >> >> > > >> > As for the storytelling aspect, yes, the Chronos story is much >> >> > > >> > more >> >> > > >> > vivid >> >> > > >> > than the "God created (x) and saw it was good" story. That's >> >> > > >> > true. >> >> > But >> >> > > >> > the >> >> > > >> > children are less likely to have bad dreams at night. Which is >> >> > really >> >> > > >> > good. >> >> >> > > >> > Sorry, Allan, I got carried away. What were you talking about? >> >> >> > > >> > 2012/12/4 Allan H <[email protected]> >> >> >> > > >> >> a series of creation is at best a wild guess with no supporting >> >> > > >> >> evidence.. >> >> > > >> >> Allan >> >> >> > > >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:42 PM, RP Singh <[email protected]> >> >> > > >> >> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > You can pinpoint the beginning of this universe but not that >> >> > > >> >> > of >> >> > > >> >> > Creation with its series of universes. >> >> >> > > >> >> > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Allan H <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > >> >> >> That is not true the beginning can be pretty much pinpointed >> >> > .. as >> >> > > >> >> >> for >> >> > > >> >> >> parallel universes that is just a wild guess with nothing to >> >> > support >> >> > > >> >> >> the >> >> > > >> >> >> other than it sounds good. There is more evidence supporting >> >> > the >> >> > > >> >> >> spiritual >> >> > > >> >> >> realm than parallel universes >> >> > > >> >> >> Allan >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light >> >> >> > > >> >> >> On Dec 4, 2012 2:26 PM, "RP Singh" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> In my view there is no beginning to creation. There is >> >> > beginning >> >> > > >> >> >>> and >> >> > > >> >> >>> end to universes There are infinite no. of universes in >> >> > parallel >> >> > > >> >> >>> and >> >> > > >> >> >>> continuously many universes are being born and many are >> >> > > >> >> >>> dying >> >> > , >> >> > > >> >> >>> but >> >> > > >> >> >>> Creation which includes infinite universes in eternal time , >> >> > just >> >> > > >> >> >>> like >> >> > > >> >> >>> the Spirit, is without beginning and without end. The >> >> > difference is >> >> > > >> >> >>> that the nature of creation is dualistic and the Spirit is >> >> > > >> >> >>> non-dual. >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Lee Douglas < >> >> > [email protected]> >> >> > > >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> >>> > Hello Andrew, >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> > Heh I can envisage many things, but alas many of them are >> >> > > >> >> >>> > not >> >> > > >> >> >>> > true. >> >> > > >> >> >>> > I >> >> > > >> >> >>> > distinguish between two things, matter and spirit. >> >> > > >> >> >>> > Mattter >> >> > is >> >> > > >> >> >>> > all >> >> > > >> >> >>> > that >> >> > > >> >> >>> > is >> >> > > >> >> >>> > physical, which includes physical 'matter' and also >> >> > > >> >> >>> > energy. >> >> > To >> >> > > >> >> >>> > me >> >> > > >> >> >>> > there >> >> > > >> >> >>> > is >> >> > > >> >> >>> > no paradox of who created the creator. Before the >> >> > > >> >> >>> > begining >> >> > there >> >> > > >> >> >>> > was >> >> > > >> >> >>> > only >> >> > > >> >> >>> > God, God in spirit, and God created the creation out of >> >> > > >> >> >>> > the >> >> > spirt >> >> > > >> >> >>> > of >> >> > > >> >> >>> > God. >> >> > > >> >> >>> > That is all matter comes from spirit. >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> > On Friday, 30 November 2012 18:32:43 UTC, andrew vecsey >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> Lee, I can see where all matter has to have an energy >> >> > component >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> to >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> it >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> because matter is manifested as atoms which have motion >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> in >> >> > them. >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> But I >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> could >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> also envision pure motion without involving any >> >> > atoms...like a >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> vibration in >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> the fabric of space, >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> On Friday, November 30, 2012 5:53:26 PM UTC+1, Lee >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> Douglas >> >> > > >> >> >>> >> wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>> Heh except of course that when it comes right down to >> >> > it.energy >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>> is >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>> matter >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>> and matter is energy. >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>> On Friday, 30 November 2012 11:22:14 UTC, andrew vecsey >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> The paradoxical dilemma of who created the creator can >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> be >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> circumnavigated by the possibility that the original >> >> > creator >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> was >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> not >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> matter, >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> but energy. Just like thinking of anything is much >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> faster >> >> > and >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> much >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> easier >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> than building it, it becomes conceivable that energy >> >> > patterns >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> could >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> have >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> evolved in a random chance way and finely tuned by >> >> > selective >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> processes to >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> reach intelligence similar to how most scientists >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> believe >> >> > that >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> patterns of >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> atoms and molecules evolved to form intelligent life. >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> Energy patterns could have evolved to a point that they >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> manipulated >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> atoms to desired patterns and forms to code the >> >> > information >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> required >> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> for >> >> ... >> >> read more ยป > > -- > > > -- ( ) |_D Allan Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living. I am a Natural Airgunner - Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly. --
