[Danny Richie]

the god-lucifer thing is

Actually the word lucifer is not and does not refer to Satin or the Devil.

It is a Hebrew word only used once in the Bible in Isaiah 14:12, but you will not find it there if you look for it unless you have a Bible that is printed in Hebrew.  

The word translated to English means "morning star" or "bright morning star".

wouldn't it be a pisser to be truly conwinced that ya have in fact found the right one, and that after having been a good & pious person, in awe of god's spirit & power, that ya end up in hell anyways, cuz ya picked the wrong one?!?

Yes, that really would be a pisser huh. I believe that there will be an answer to that question in the end.

A third philosophy would be that: “With a Big-Bang, God created the universe and that evolution of celestial bodies and live beings are His process of continuing creation.”

I guess that one could theorize just about anything. Seams odd to me that people will have a belief in God yet deny his word.  

[maxwalrath]

A third philosophy would be that: “With a Big-Bang, God created the universe and that evolution of celestial bodies and live beings are His process of continuing creation.”

tw

...otherwise known as the theory that creationists now have; this after decades of trying to debunk the big bang theory and Darwin. I think this new shift that most creationists have made in the last few years (toward intelligent design, which is gaining popularity so quickly) is incredibly self serving after finally starting to concede that Darwin and Hubbel weren't crackpots.

[ryno]

I guess that one could theorize just about anything. Seams odd to me that people will have a belief in God yet deny his word.  

Sometimes during discussions of this type, different peoples definitions of God can lead to confusion. When you say God, you mean the christian God. Others may mean a higher power, whaterever that may be. So for them, and me, to say they have a belief in God, but not the bible, makes sense. From my viewpoint, quoting scripture and praying is a valid way of practicing your beliefs, if you have belief in the christian God. If your looking for belief I don't think this can help. Maybe that's why tyson has struggled. Kudos to you tyson, at least your out there looking and asking questions, thats how you find belief, whatever that ends up being. Too many people on both sided just wander without thinking. That's obviously not the case with this group of people.
ryan

[John Casler]

Seems like there are "way" too many things to contemplate (or at least get on your plate ) here.

1) The existence, properties, and definition of GOD

2) What is the socio-philosophical impact/significance of religion/faith

3) What is the "personal" impact/significance of religion/faith

4) The battle of God and Satan (Good and Evil)

5) Saving (private) Tyson (? from what)

6) All the world's wonders proves there is a GOD

7) Nothing "proves" there is a God

Perfection proves GOD

9) Nothing is perfect

10) Comparing esoteric thought is rather fun and stimulating

God is a concept  :John Lennon

[Danny Richie]

Actually John,

In the Greek texts perfection is represented by the number "7" not the number "8".     Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[Rob Babcock]

I guess that one could theorize just about anything. Seams odd to me that people will have a belief in God yet deny his word.  

To be fair, deists believe in God but don't believe  s/he or it speaks to us.  IMO Deism is as valid as Christianity, Islam, or any other religion.  The stretch from belief that the universe isn't random to faith in a snowy haired guy on a throne in the sky isn't one everyone is prepared to accept.

[doug s.]

I guess that one could theorize just about anything. Seams odd to me that people will have a belief in God yet deny his word.  

seems odd to *me* that people will have a belief in god, yet also believe that one persons' "word" is more or less right than anothers'.   jesus vs mohammed vs buddha vs vishnu vs ???  

doug s.

[Florian]

I dont believe in GOD or anything else for that matter, nor do i care what anybody else believes. So far poeples believes have killed more people than they saved.

 

[doug s.]

I dont believe in GOD or anything else for that matter, nor do i care what anybody else believes. So far poeples believes have killed more people than they saved.

 

*whatever* anyone believes, it is certainly true that their behaviours regarding their beliefs have killed *way* more folk than have been saved.  which is why i don't care what *anyone* believes - as long as they keep it to themselves, don't organize, don't proselytize...  

regards,

doug s.

[nathanm]

If god wrote the bible why does it need to be translated into different languages by fallible humans?  Why don't all humans understand "godglish" or whatever language he speaks.  It seems rather derelict to create numerous beings who, if they are indeed required to do god's bidding, do not understand a single universal method of communication.

If god wrote the bible where did he leave his first transcript and who found it?  It's a really long book, and written long before the invention of the printing press, so I'm curious how those hundreds of pages came to be and what they were written on.  Papyrus?  Stone tablets?  Yellow legal pad?  How many pages were there?

Why hasn't god released a new edition?  Certainly it is long overdue for some updates.  Why hasn't he gone on a book tour?  There'd be lines stretching for miles with people waiting for god himself to sign the inside flap of their bibles! Could be very lucrative I bet.

[Aether Audio]

And away we go..."proselytizing"!  

You'll have to kill me (or at least ban me anyway)  - to stop me!

More on "Phi":

http://goldennumber.net/theology.htm

http://evolutionoftruth.com/msc/setidna.htm

Darn! - Still haven't found any "proof" yet.  "Yust" some interesting stuff.

-Bob

PS-  

Luke ch.16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. 27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead!

[doug s.]

And away we go..."proselytizing"!  

You'll have to kill me (or at least ban me anyway)  - to stop me!

More on "Phi":

http://goldennumber.net/theology.htm

http://evolutionoftruth.com/msc/setidna.htm

Darn! - Still haven't found any "proof" yet.  "Yust" some interesting stuff.

-Bob

PS-  

Luke ch.16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. 27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead!

ps - your quote is from a *book*.  folk can quote lotsa stuff from lotsa books.  it doesn't mean it's true, yust cuz ya read it in a book.  especially since no one knows which book might be the book w/the correct answers.

re: proselytizing - ya can do that all ya want.  all it means to me is yure insecure in yer faith - otherwise, ya wouldn't feel the need.  imo of course!    

but there's one thing that's *not* yust  "imo" - and it's the fact that the only *real* thing proselytizing does is cause people to want to kill each other.  proselytizing by its wery nature breeds exclusion, separation, hate.  proselytizing is extremely devisive -  "my way or the highway."  wery wery bad, wery wery evil.

doug s.

[nathanm]

In that case I declare a Holy War upon Doug S.'s spelling mistakes.  His heretical English ways can go unpunished no longer!  We will hold his feet to the coals until he puts Js where Ys used to be.  We will lash him with whips until Vs and Ws are in their proper, god-given places.  We will search his body for the Devil's Mark which causes him not to capitalize the first word of a sentence!  REPENT brother Doug, lest ye be smoten!

[woodsyi]

Bob,

I know this is your circle and you can facilitate it anyway you want within the boundrys of AC guideline.  I will understand if this reply gets removed in a short time, but I would challenge you to keep this on in the spirit of the original post that started this thread.  If you are asking the reader to broaden their horizon --suspend normal beliefs temporarily--  to consider your proposals with fair mind, I think it is only fair to also consider alternatives as long as they are presented without rancor and vitriol but with consideration and respect for differences of opinions and beliefs.  But if this was just a dogmatic thread to posit your position that would not allow other lines of thoughts, then this does not belong here.  

So, here is a website which parellels my idea of religion.  

http://www.faithnet.org.uk/Theology/johnhick.htm

[doug s.]

Bob,

I know this is your circle and you can facilitate it anyway you want within the boundrys of AC guideline. I will understand if this reply gets removed in a short time, but I would challenge you to keep this on in the spirit of the original post that started this thread. If you are asking the reader to broaden their horizon --suspend normal beliefs temporarily-- to consider your proposals with fair mind, I think it is only fair to also consider alternatives as long as they are presented without rancor and vitriol but with consideration and respect for differences of opinions and beliefs. But if this was just a dogmatic thread to posit your position that would not allow other lines of thoughts, then this does not belong here.

So, here is a website which parellels my idea of religion.

http://www.faithnet.org.uk/Theology/johnhick.htm

nice link, woodsyi.

doug s.

[John Casler]

Hi Bob,

Thought you might enjoy this NY Times piece:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/22/national/22design.html?pagewanted=1&incamp=article_popular

[LAL]

So this is just an accident or quirk of nature?

     http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html

[John Casler]

So this is just an accident or quirk of nature?

     http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html

Hi LAL,

That is a great, and very interesting illustration.  I wouldn't use the term "accident", but I would use the term "nature".

The amazing concepts of infinite, and infintesimal, clearly show that there are "no" boundaries.

In trying to assign the creation of this to a concious source, you have created a boundary.  If one was to say that this "ALL" was created by a Supreme Being, one has to then begin the infinite journey of explaining who or what created that being, and the one that created the next and so on into infinity again.

There is nothing in nature that shows us an "end" to anything, so we cannot conclude that a "single" being can or could exist that would not have an even greater "Supremacy" creating or governing them.

Its called "Infinite Progression", where we can progress infinitely from place to place or concept to concept.

In other words if God created this, then who/what created God, and then who/what created them, ad infinitum?

Again, that is a great illustration.

[LAL]

Hello John,
Glad you liked the illlustration. I don't have time and I type too slow to give a detailed response to your statements. I will suggest that the physical universe does have limits to it.  The idea that every atom of everything that now or ever has existed came into existence out  of a "kernel of energy" smaller that this ". " in less time than it takes to snap your fingers at the beginning of time ought to give doubters pause to think.  Since this event(the Big Bang) does not naturally occur( it has never happened before or since and cannot be duplicated) it can only be described as supernatural .

As  to your queries about who or what preceeded  God.  The biblical answer is this -nothing.  In the the Old Testament when Mose was confronted with the voice of God in a burning bush he asked by what name he should refer to God.  The answer was this," I Am".  None but  the one God can make this claim about himself.  In the New Testament Jesus also used this phrase to describe himself.  Interesting  isn't it that thousands of years ago when all of mankind thought gods existed in stones, trees, sun, moon, wind, water, lightening, thunder etc.  the God of the ancient Hebrews told then the physical world was separate  from and was created by one God who simply is and was and will be.  Modern science now confirms for us that no gods exist in material matter.  In that respect we are no more enlightened than the ancient Hebrews.  To the extent we doubt or deny the existence of the I Am who told them this we are less enlighten than they were.
LAL

[Aether Audio]

To be sure..

Intellectual gymnastics are good for the mind.  So much the better if one can have fun in the process, I suppose.  In the end though, as in all exercise, there are limits to its potential gains.

Comprehending the infinite seems as much.  Doing so requires a bit of a stretch and is probably good.  Encapsulating it within the boundaries of the mind though, requires the mind to exceed it.  The pot is always lesser than the potter – the thing made lesser than it’s maker.  Were they even equal, neither would be.  

If so, such would represent an abandonment of causality.  The materialist view does not permit “miracles” of mutual, simultaneous co-creation.  Many systems appear to exhibit such, but upon closer examination we still find action and reaction – back and forth.  Time sequenced chains of events are the stuff all science is based upon.  So there we have it; the former and the later, the action and the reaction, the event and it's effects, the creator and the creation - be they great or small.  Newton figured that out a long time ago.

So…we find as well that the parent is lesser than the fetus.  Yet, the imprint of design is hidden within but a single fertilized egg.  Is the ability to even consider the "infinite" the imprint of a greater, preceding form nested within us?

Given a system of exponential growth and eternal life, would we become a civilization of infinite hierarchies?  The child would forever be like the parent, but never equal, as the parent would always be “ahead of” the child in knowledge and learning.  Should medical science vanquish death and risk such consequence?  For now, death is the “Great Equalizer.”  For now, maybe it should stay that way.  How many Hitler’s do we need?

Should the trend of theoretical physicists towards the “Membrane” based view of reality http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.html

continue and become the new Darwinism of Universal creation, will we be forced to call them all liars in order to hold on to our materialistic views?  If the “Multi-Verse”

www.astronomy.pomona.edu/Projects/moderncosmo/Sean's%20mutliverse.html  (link won't post - server doesn't like the ' in the word "Sean's" - sorry)

explanation of it all is their last recourse, are we forced to swallow the “Big Pill” of alternate realities?  If so, do our efforts to dismiss the possibility of a “god” become “infinitely” more difficult?  I’d say so.

Go ahead – though, opine away.  There is no escaping the end of it all, regardless.  The grave awaits us all and then we'll know for sure.  Might as well, all you have to loose is time.

-Bob