In answer to that Archy for me religion is and should be a wholly personal matter between yourself and which ever concept of God you are going with. Yeah yeah I know I have been known to argue the toss between this bit of dogma and that bit of dogma, and this concept or that concept of what God is, you realise I do this in order to examine my own ideas and beliefs rather than to sway RP ohh I mean people to my own faith.
On Monday, 10 December 2012 13:25:04 UTC, archytas wrote: > > I'm more materialist than RP in that I see religion as more to do with > what we do with and for each other - this said I prefer private prayer > to collective knee-bending. How does tolerance fare once religionists > become 'so pure' they can treat anyone else as infidel? > > On Dec 10, 1:33 am, James <[email protected]> wrote: > > The original post, that is, hmm sorry. :) > > > > On 12/9/2012 5:40 PM, James wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > RP, I have been considering your post and have taken it in the view of > a > > > biological perspective. It is one that I do think important but I am > > > still left wondering why to attach such significance in an exclusive > > > sense. It may be that I am overthinking the concept, it is one that I > > > hold respect for but not to a degree of conclusiveness. Is there more > I > > > should examine? > > > > > Browsing the TimesOfIndia recently I found talk about the common views > > > on China and worry over world dominance. I imagine there are vicious > > > clashes between them and the Arab speaking regions, it seems > unfortunate > > > perhaps like being surrounded by strong interests on each side. I > > > obviously have little political world knowledge. :) > > > > > On 12/9/2012 1:15 PM, RP Singh wrote: > > >> Religion is first and foremost about prayer and worship. There is no > > >> need for that but we must accept a morality code and adhere by it , > > >> there should be a feeling of love for one's fellow creatures and > > >> tolerance towards them. > > > > >> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 8:41 PM, archytas<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Given what they have done with some decent spiritual messages Allan, > I > > >>> sometimes think of 'them' as Xstains. I was born into the tradition, > > >>> but thought it was twaddle by the time Sunday school was interfering > > >>> with soccer and cricket. I have no doubt we should focus more on > > >>> spirituality, fellowship, hospitality, goodwill and sensitivity to > > >>> others. I just don't want to base this on a pack of lies, banning > > >>> women from hierarchies, prejudicing gays and xenophobic stuff about > > >>> outsiders and being part of god's chosen. It's hard to think like > > >>> this without being prejudiced against the 'worshipers of the blue > and > > >>> white striped rabbit' and purveyors of godswank. The inner danger is > > >>> becoming religiously anti-religious. I'm actually rather touched by > > >>> good aspects of some of the stuff. > > >>> I have no idea why we are clinging to this rock - but I don't want > it > > >>> to be about being amused by Aussie pranksters making hoax calls or > > >>> murals celebrating vile killing such as one finds in the Vatican. > > >>> Science clearly provides us no answers to our spiritual plight and > > >>> religion as I witness it internally is largely about future memory > > >>> with less myth in it and less reason to take religion as we might > > >>> otherwise take opiates. > > >>> A colleague working in India is saying his students are reading Mein > > >>> Kampf - more or less replacing the word Jew with Muslim and agreeing > > >>> the plot entirely. We could do with some sensible religion and > > >>> economics to fill the void that leaves people this vulnerable. > > >>> Knowledge of thermodynamics or the biochemistry of life isn't going > to > > >>> do that for us. > > > > >>> On Dec 8, 10:01 am, Allan H<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> xtian aka christianity > > > > >>>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:02 AM, rigs<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> It depends on what religion you are referring to. Very funny line > > >>>>> about Pilate! :-) > > > > >>>>> On Dec 6, 4:09 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: > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > --
