And in truth Allan religion does evolove, perhaps slowly but evolove it 
does.
On Thursday, 6 December 2012 19:21:35 UTC, Allan Heretic 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] <javascript:>> 
> 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 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> life and to allow them to evolve on their own to 
> complex 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> intelligent 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> beings 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> able to wonder at and eventually to solve the riddle 
> of 
> >> > where 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> they 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> came 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> from, where they are going and why they are alive. 
> >> > Meaning and 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> purpose could 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> then be given to our fleeting moment of existence. 
> >> 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> On Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:55:05 PM UTC+1, 
> archytas 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>> wrote: 
> >> 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> .......  All we have in respect of this is to posit 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> creation, begging the question of what created that 
> in an 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> infinite 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> regress.  .....We might get to an intelligent state 
> in 
> >> > which 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> creation 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> myths are replaced by something more plausible and 
> Truth 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> comes 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> closer. 
> >> 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> On 29 Nov, 01:41, RP Singh <[email protected]> 
> wrote: 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > Neil , even after re-transposition how long could 
> the 
> >> > brain 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > live 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > --1000 years , 10000years or maybe as long as the 
> >> > universe 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > ,but 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > ultimately it will die or be destroyed at the end 
> - 
> >> > time of 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > the 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > universe. What survives is the Truth behind life 
> and 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > nothing 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > else. 
> >> 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:33 AM, archytas 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > <[email protected]> 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > wrote: 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > What survives is the gene - subject to 
> mutations 
> >> > etc.  We 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > are 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > already 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > 'Borg' in the sense of mass assimilation. 
>  One's mind 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > could 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > be 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > transposed to another substrate (nearish 
> future) - 
> >> > our 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > bodies 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > are 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > currently replaced every 5 years or so- and the 
> new 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > substrate 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > could 
> >> > > >> >> >>> >>>>> > > have nanobots that would allow minds to 
> >> 
> >> ... 
> >> 
> >> 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. 
>

-- 



Reply via email to