| Author | Message | ||
     Pwnzor |
Westboro is a cult of lawyer rabble who don't deserve to tread upon the same ground as the rest of us. Gobadgers & Ft_bstrd, I've got responses for you, but I'm at work and it's Friday so I'll have to get back to you... I read through your posts and I appreciate the time you both took, so be patient with me. Yesterday was slow at work so I was able to post a lot... today, not so much. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Groupage Friday, part load freight world goes mad. Same everywhere, all the customers go "we have to get it shipped today!". Always thought it would be economic to give a discount to customers who schedule for slack days. This break bought to you courtesy of the Road Transport Industry. 'Put it on wheels, you know it makes sense.' And now we return you to your regular programming. | ||
| Jayvee |
"We do all agree that religious freedom is a good thing?" But we were having such fun bashing Muslims... | ||
| Reepicheep |
Javee, so if you believe in religious freedoms, and a core tenant of a particular faith is death (literally) to religious freedom... are you *against* that religion in order to be *for* religious freedom? | ||
| Reepicheep |
Oh, and GoBadgers, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts and experience on the topic! That was great information and perspective and I appreciate you sharing it. | ||
| Aesquire |
So do I even if I took a shot at it. I have made 2 decisions about religion. I will not proselytize. I will be honest. The first because it is offensive to all to assert I know the one true way and those not of my belief will go to Hades. Might be so but it's pretty arrogant. The second because most of the death and horror on the planet in my lifetime comes from religions that enshrine the Lie as a blessing if it advances that religion. Taqiya is the bedrock of evil. I may not be a shining example, but by admitting I am possibly wrong I show that those who insist they cannot be for the frauds they are. (Message edited by aesquire on May 08, 2015) | ||
| Tankhead |
God created man with the understanding that a large portion of man would reject him, would reject placing God as central authority. Assuming that there is an afterlife, there will be God and those who recognized God as central authority separated from those who chose something else as the central authority in their lives. Self, Allah, Buddha, nature, science. God allows evil to exist because to not allow it would mean curtailment of man's free will. ________________________________________ FT B with total respect, this is what I mean when I say pretentious. HOw do you know why GOD created man? If you believe in a god, how do you suppose to speak about things you "think you know" ? Know one knows. And, I believe that anyone who says they know is not being honest. I am not throwing stones here it is just my opinion. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
I may not be a shining example, but by admitting I am possibly wrong I show that those who insist they cannot be for the frauds they are. To paraphrase Court, That's a true statement. For myself, I concur wholeheartedly. | ||
| Tankhead |
I understand what you mean, but God isn't looking for our respect. It's absolute folly to believe that our finite minds could begin to understand His plans. Pwnsor, same question to you. The first sentence you suppose to know what GOD is looking for and in the very next sentence you prove my point. Again, I really mean no disrespect here to you or anyone who believes in a deity, but at some point can't you come to realize that you have no real idea what you are talking about and that faith and belief in a deity can come across as, well, at best silly and worst insane? (Message edited by tankhead on May 08, 2015) | ||
| Mackja |
"belief in a deity can come across at best silly and worst insane" Would you say Aristotle was silly or insane? It is quite reasonable to believe in God! http://www.logicmuseum.com/ontological/aristotleon tological.htm | ||
| Sifo |
Tankhead, why would a belief in a deity be any more silly or insane than a belief that there is no deity? | ||
| Aesquire |
By frauds I mean those who say the science is settled or they have proof without ever showing it.... like golden tablets the unbelievers may not see, or e-mails on an erased server..... I personally find Pastafarians silly. But I think I'm supposed to. | ||
| Tankhead |
Sifo, these questions, as you know, will just continue and continue and continue. If people want to believe in a God more power to them, I am happy that they are happy. But when they profess to have a knowledge about what their god wants or does not want, is where the potential for crazy behavior begins. As pwnsor posted about charlatans. wars based on religion, preachers begging for more money from their parish. Killing people because of a drawing.... You know what I am talking about. | ||
| Tpoppa |
I have faith...in Science. | ||
| Tankhead |
Mackia keep the context of what I am saying. tpoppa, word. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
I have faith ... in good Science. There, fixed it for ya.  | ||
| Aesquire |
I like Mad Science myself. Steampunk Rules! As opposed to fraud science or social science... or real science. | ||
| Mackja |
Their is this belief that religion and science are at odds with one another, and they are not. Agreed that their are branches of fundamentalism which refuse to look at reason and evidence, but this is not traditional Christianity. No one can convince anyone else of the existence of God, that takes faith, but one can most certainly reason the existence of God. Aristotle who had no idea of who God is, reasoned that their has to be one, his reasons are scientific. To quote St Thomas Aquinas "Those who have faith no explanation is necessary, those who don't no explanation is possible". | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
It's absolute folly to believe that our finite minds could begin to understand His plans. How do we know what is "real"? Reality is objective depending on your perspective. As I mentioned previously, "time" is a great example of how our limited perception shapes our reality.Time is not linear, yet, we perceive it as such. There are particles of sub-atomic matter that sometimes appear in two places at once or disappear from our reality only to reappear. Clearly, more is going than meets the eye. | ||
| Tankhead |
Agreed that their are branches of fundamentalism which refuse to look at reason and evidence, I agree with this statement.. Aristotle who had no idea of who God is, reasoned that their has to be one. This was taken from the inter webs: Aristotle argues that there must be some eternal and imperishable substance, otherwise all substance would be perishable, and then everything in the world would be perishable. But the world and time are not perishable, therefore.... The science at that time, I believe, still thought the world was flat. And that the universe was flat and that there was no depth of the universe thus the constellations. The world can be perishable in many ways.... meteor.... Sun burns out life ends.... blah blah blah..... | ||
| Aesquire |
Arguably Aristotle's conclusions were philosophical.  The Jesuits have a conceit that God is unprovable and thus there can be no proof. "Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy" jokes about the babel fish. A thing so unlikely to exist by chance it is proof of a higher power. Naturally when proven, God disappears in a puff of logic.  Personally, I disagree with the Jesuits on this, which may explain some yardstick scars. Science and faith are not exclusive. Too many people try to prove the unprovable, and there sure are some weird notions. Like the declaration that the Earth is 6000 years old because otherwise the magma would be cooled by now. This conclusion by a noted scientist was made before we understood radioactivity, the source of the heat he didn't comprehend. Now many are utterly certain of that flawed number. Ignoring written history. ( but not European history. ... ) Believe what you want. If you think aliens gave us architecture, enjoy. I note we would have a hard time building a Saturn 5 today and that's from my lifetime. Pyramids seem impossible to a peasant who was generations from their building, and equally amazing to Romans centuries later. | ||
| Tpoppa |
...and Stephen Hawking concluded that the creation of universe did nor require any god. He certainly had access to more complete data than did Aristotle. | ||
| Mackja |
Earth being flat, sun burning out, etc etc has no bearing on the proposition of their being a eternal substance, because the eternal substance is the cause of that action. we assume that if life as we know it dies off the world ends, this world will continue with or with out man, with sunlight or with out, the planet will continue. The universe is still expanding and will continue to expand, Aristotle's reasoning is still sound, their are many stages of existence. And then their is the Summa! I love Aquinas! | ||
| Mackja |
Sooo Hawking is an authority on who or what God is! The universe had to have a start a beginning, Hawking has a theory, and theories are not fact by any means. So if you would say that Hawking has a theory that the universe did not require a God, I would not argue with the statement. As we all know, no one can prove or disprove the existence of God. Like I stated above, the existence of God can be reasoned. | ||
| Tpoppa |
Before you poke holes in Hawking's conclusions you should actually read them. He isn't an expert of god, he's an astrophysicist. | ||
| Sifo |
Science, as a means to prove God does not exist is a fools errand. Science to prove the existence of God IMO is almost certainly going to fail in it's quest also. Neither is good science if those involved are out to prove their point. Intelligent Design theory is quite interesting however. Not proof of anything, but raises some real difficult questions about the origin of life and our best competing theories. The best information I've seen on this is the book "Signature in the Cell", by Stephen C. Meyer. I have little interest in debating it here again. Honestly, it's been long enough ago that I couldn't do the argument justice, even if I wanted to engage in the many hours of typing that would be required to scratch the surface. It's a pretty tedious read, but I found it well worth it. | ||
| Mackja |
Not poking holes, I just look at theories for what they are, a theory. While I most certainly agree he is a brilliant man in his field of study. Science can only tell us so much, what it can't tell us is what it means to be human, it can tell us what humans did, when and where, but not the reasoning behind why. Philosophy and theology can give us greater insight as to the question why. Reason is a concept science cannot touch,or see. Their is no way science can prove God nor can it disprove God either. At least their are people here who are respectful of each others positions to make having a discussion worth while, and that speaks volumes about the quality of people who post on this forum. This is a really deep subject, no way to really do justice on a forum. Trying to discuss philosophical reasoning at length is arduous to say the least. (Message edited by mackja on May 08, 2015) | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Tankhead, God created man with the understanding that a large portion of man would reject him, would reject placing God as central authority. Assuming that there is an afterlife, there will be God and those who recognized God as central authority separated from those who chose something else as the central authority in their lives. Self, Allah, Buddha, nature, science. God allows evil to exist because to not allow it would mean curtailment of man's free will. ________________________________________ FT B with total respect, this is what I mean when I say pretentious. HOw do you know why GOD created man? If you believe in a god, how do you suppose to speak about things you "think you know" ? Know one knows. And, I believe that anyone who says they know is not being honest. I am not throwing stones here it is just my opinion. I can only draw conclusions from how we see God interact with man during the 4000 years BC and the 2000+ years since then. I can only extrapolate my thoughts from either these interactions or descriptions of the characteristics of God. If God is all knowing and is outside of time, then God has perfect foreknowledge of time, of the choices we will make in the future. If this is true, then God knew before each of us were created, what choices we would make. If this is true, then God would know that some would reject Him while others would not. We know from OT and NT accounts that there are those who reject God and those who recognize him as the central authority in their lives. God is clear that there is no other way to Him but through Jesus Christ. These aren't my opinions, these are documented, demonstrated characteristics of God and accounts of His interaction with man. I speak about the character of God and the desires of God from what God tells us in scripture. I have a men's bible study each Friday morning. This morning, this exact subject was discussed with our pastor. "God's Plan" is for us to understand Him and accept him as central authority in our lives. His plan is for us to also be "salt and light", a force for change and hope to the world. Sometimes God allows evil, illness, misfortune to take place to further his aims. As an example, I have a son with Aspergers Syndrome (Spectrum Disorder). He was diagnosed at age 2. We knew earlier that something wasn't right. With that diagnosis, we had no idea what the future would look like for him. It was as though our child had died. You have a child imbued with all the intent and promise heaped upon them. How you will interact with them, what they will be like, sharing common interests. In an instant all of those promises evaporate. I have felt that I've gotten a little bit of him back every day. We've grown to appreciate who he is just as he is. It isn't what WE planned, but it is the life we know. Some would blame a "loving God who could allow this to happen". I don't. I am thankful not for the hardships but because it forces me to be a better father, a more engaged father, a more patient father than I would otherwise be. More importantly, my experiences with my son allow me to speak from experience in dealing with others with children with similar conditions. I know first hand the pain, the regret, the loss, the sorrow, the daily struggles, the isolation. I can truly say "I know how you feel. I understand." It is this shared experience that allows for the type of interpersonal interactions God seems to advocate. God never advocated a go it alone experience. He cautioned against the forsaking of fellowship. It is this shared experience, this love between each of us that is what God seeks. It is what was described in his interactions with Abraham and the Jewish people. It is what was described in his interactions through Jesus. I don't believe that God seeks for us to presume his will, but I do believe that he seeks for us to understand his character. Sometimes will can be deduced from an understanding of character. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
The universe had to have a start a beginning The "Big Bang" is just a theory, albeit a widely accepted theory. There are other theories that say the universe has no beginning nor an end. "People like us who believe in physics know that the distinction between the past, the present and the future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion" Einstein | ||
| Hootowl |
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/35681-now-it-is-su ch-a-bizarrely-improbable-coincidence-that-anythin g |
