I know you dis agree .. birth control and woman bishops effectively no more than administration. How has those events changing the theology? They still strickly following the rules unchanged since early centuries Allan
Matrix ** th3 beginning light On Dec 7, 2012 1:35 PM, "Lee Douglas" <[email protected]> wrote: > You are joking right Allan? > > The changes are only in administration? So Catholics the world over are > not using contraception in spite of what the pope says? No such change I > think is driven and will be further driven by the faiths followers more > than it's leaders. When the new Arch Bishop of Canterbury leaves his new > post any changes that he has affected will still be there, one day woman > Bishops will be common place, despite any changes in administration. > > Besides if you think of religous ideas in the same way as any and all > other ideas, then it is clear to see that such ideas will evolve or die. > We no longer belive that the Earth is the center of the universe, that > right there is a dead religous idea. Yet Catholosism is still very much > with us, and that right there is an example of evolotion of the idea rather > than the admisistration. > On Friday, 7 December 2012 11:40:07 UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: > >> The changes are only in administration,, to me that is not evolutionary >> type change >> Allan >> >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light >> On Dec 7, 2012 11:51 AM, "Lee Douglas" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hahah maybey, maybe. I am though the eternal optimist so I see things >>> differantly. >>> >>> The Anglican church in particular are making some good moves. >>> >>> There are though only two things I wish to comment on at this momnet. >>> >>> My career in IT support thus far informs me that people do seem to have >>> an inbuilt resistance to change, and ultimatly the Christian church in >>> particular but of course all other dogmatic religions need to change or >>> they risk dieing out. >>> On Friday, 7 December 2012 10:02:37 UTC, Allan Heretic wrote: >>> >>>> From what I have seen it does evolve.. it seems mostly in the >>>> negative directions.. probably because of greed and a desire to >>>> control rather than spirituality.. there are exceptions but they are >>>> rare. >>>> Allan >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > 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]> 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. >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ( >>>> ) >>>> |_D Allan >>>> >>>> Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living. >>>> >>>> >>>> I am a Natural Airgunner - >>>> >>>> Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly. >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- > > > > --
