Burning Holy Books

[Lao]

I aint gettin on a plane with you pair, HEATHENS.

Atheist please if you dont mind, Heathens tend to refer to people who belong to polytheistic or small unrecognized denominational cults/religions.

 

wouldnt want to get tarred with the same brush as the irrational religious minority.

 

[mæŋksmən]

I dont care i still aint gettin on a plane with you.

[Chinahand]

Aye righto, maybe we will understand better when we can explain what the 90% of our universes mass consists of, the stuff we cant see.

 

i missed this quote.

 

What do you mean by random? Things aren't really random in the sense of there being no order.

You know yourself that reactions, movements, energy, etc. are all governed by rules and events follow from that.

 

There were no rules before the BB, then there were, rather defeats your logic.

Erm - so you think you know what was prior to the BB do you?

And whatever it was - with a conception of time totally separate from our conception of time etc - you think it was intelligent, arranged for our universe to be the way it is and gives people souls (or some other eternal component that lasts after death) and takes them away again to somewhere else when they die? Is that really what you believe mæŋksmən? Why?

 

Sorry, but it isn't logical, isn't reasonable, isn't based on evidence.

 

And please stop going on about randomness and atoms being created in the big bang. Energy in one form was unleashed at the big bang. Energy isn't created or destroyed but transforms from one form to another - it is not impossible that the big bang was simply a transformation of energy from a type we do not yet understand into a type sensible to time and the dimensions we live in.

 

The energy unleashed at the big bang obeyed, and still obeys, certain rules - why - we don't know, but then again why is pi equal to 3.14159265... it may be simply an intrinsic part of the universe.

 

Those rules - energy and matter doing what energy and matter does is what created stars and synthesized atoms to let the planets exist and life to form and man to evolve.

 

That isn't random in the sense you are using the word - it's constrained randomness by the fact that matter behaves in certain ways. If you constrain randomness you can get order.

 

An example:

 

Draw a triangle. Start anywhere within it. Randomly pick one of the three points of the triangle - move half way from where you are now to that point - make a small mark. This mark is now your new starting place - randomly pick one of the three points of the triangle - move half way from your mark to that point - make another mark. Do it again - alot.

 

This entirely random process produces THIS.

 

 

Order results - incredibly complex order - you can go as deep within the fractal as you like all you'll get is triangles and triangles - all from a random process.

 

You can say its goblins and angels carrying you to heaven if you want - but its just maths, intrinsic to what it is.

 

You keep appealing to your psychology and saying everything, but especially you in your sentience, is the product of some intelligence. That is your ego talking with no evidence to back it up. Does a crow live on after death as well as those nearest and dearest to you? A chimp? A neanderthal? Where?

 

Where does this essence that you think passes somewhere else when you die live inside you - where does it go and how after death?

 

Sorry but to say you are speculating is far far too generous - you are making up a comforting story, which has no basis. A story humans have told themsleves for generations and who's only validation is its conservatism - there is not an smidgen of evidence to support it, or justify it.

 

You might as well claim you all turn into flowers on a planet circling Beetlejuice when you die. Its a nice story, but based on nothing but hopes.

[Lao]

I dont care i still aint gettin on a plane with you.

 

You see that right there is one of the reasons that i cannot beleive in such a being, i feel very superior to a deity that would wait until i am in the presence of several innocent people before punishing me for my disbelief.

 

I have this laughable picture of a deity in the guise of a cackling villian, rubbing his hands together as he watches me board a plane, oblivious to the numerous believers behind me walking to their deaths. Such a god would be unworthy of our worship. And no bully deserves our fear.

 

Perhaps i should publish my travel plans on the internet for the benefit of the superstitious.

[mæŋksmən]

Good post chinaman, but you go off on too many tangents, i cannot, and have not tried to explain the intellgent influence on how things have worked out, however because i cannot fully explain my thoughts on this matter as there are no words that fit, does not make them any less viable than anyone elses thoughts, you fail to give any logical explanation for the BB, it is at the very heart of my thoughts on intelligent creation and what you replied to, without even touching on it apart from sarcasm in the first sentence.

If you can give me a logical reason for the BB that does not include intelligence, then do so.

[mæŋksmən]

I dont care i still aint gettin on a plane with you.

 

You see that right there is one of the reasons that i cannot beleive in such a being, i feel very superior to a deity that would wait until i am in the presence of several innocent people before punishing me for my disbelief.

 

I have this laughable picture of a deity in the guise of a cackling villian, rubbing his hands together as he watches me board a plane, oblivious to the numerous believers behind me walking to their deaths. Such a god would be unworthy of our worship. And no bully deserves our fear.

 

Perhaps i should publish my travel plans on the internet for the benefit of the superstitious.

 

germany here we come.

 

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ddb_1204404185

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Aye righto, maybe we will understand better when we can explain what the 90% of our universes mass consists of, the stuff we cant see.

Absolutely, but before then, stop assuming when you don't know.

 

Things aren't really random in the sense of there being no order.

Well my definition of random is that things are left utterly to chance. But that's not how the universe operates. If an apple drops from a tree it will hit the ground, for example. There is an order to things. But I don't think an intelligence made the apple head to the ground. Same with the Big Bang. I have no reason to assume an intelligence behind it and the development of the universe.

 

 

There were no rules before the BB, then there were, rather defeats your logic.

Nobody knows what came before the Big Bang. They may have been an utterly different order to different things.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Good post chinaman, but you go off on too many tangents, i cannot, and have not tried to explain the intellgent influence on how things have worked out, however because i cannot fully explain my thoughts on this matter as there are no words that fit, does not make them any less viable than anyone elses thoughts, you fail to give any logical explanation for the BB, it is at the very heart of my thoughts on intelligent creation and what you replied to, without even touching on it apart from sarcasm in the first sentence.

If you can give me a logical reason for the BB that does not include intelligence, then do so.

Wow. You still don't get it.

 

First of all your ideas are NOT as viable as anyone elses. Nobody is discounting that it is a possibility, however, YOU have a specific idea. And that is that an intelligence behind the universe (or BB) is a distinct possibility or even the most plausible. That's not a viable assumption, because there is nothing to back it up, other than your ignorance that the alternative is that the universe is all chance and chaos reigned before the BB.

 

When you are making a claim about something being the most plausible explanation or the most likely or a distinct possibility then it is YOU who need to explain you thinking and so far your thinking has been flawed in respect of commenting on randomness and your understanding of the Big Bang.

 

Chinahand nor anyone else needs to provide an explanation to sit aside your 'filling in the gaps with God' idea. You are the one making a claim for no good reason; Chinahand is doing what anyone rational would do and say they don't know.

The truth to the origins of the universe and what came before it might be incomprehensible to us with what we know about science NOW or it be due to processes that remain unknown forever.

 

I think that if you had never had any concept of religion or religious ideas and looked and tried to understand the Big Bang you would not have this belief in the strong likelihood of a Creator. It's a religious/superstitious thing based on trying to understand what appears to be impossible, incomprehensible, or unlikely.

[mæŋksmən]

Again you bang on and on about claims and proof etc, i only need weight of probabilty to come down on the side of intelligence behind creation as we know it stemming from the BB.

The BB falls outside of our natural realm, this fact begs the question, is there anything else to do with the BB which exists outside of the natural realm.

 

It not as clear cut to me.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I am banging on about claims and proof, because you are making claims without any evidence. You think it is probable and likely - that's a claim. You shouldn't be even talking about weight of probability when you don't even know what is probable or not, none of us do. But you do, you bring in this specific and peculiar idea of an intelligence being an influence - how do you determine this to be PROBABLE? How is your probability worked out?

 

The Big Bang doesn't fall outside, it was the beginning to our universe. It could be that there was another type of universe before it and some process ended that universe and began ours. That is a possibility. As it an intelligent being being involved a possibility, but this idea is only encountered and brought to mind because we are naturally superstitious and constantly come into contact the idea of creation behind the result of a Godlike thing.

 

It's far more cut and dry with you than it is for me or Chinahand.

[- Paul -]

 

However once youve had 2 or 3 people breath out their last breathe whilst you have your arms around them you may think different eventually.

 

Wow what a hero you are

[spook]

Dont screw with the possibility of eternal damnation just to try to be clever on a discussion forum.

 

I can't work out if Spook is a wind up merchant or a fucking loon........answers on a postcard....

 

I’m neither. I’m a devout Christian. Nor is this a “wind up”

 

Maybe this is the first time some of you have encountered a “low church” devout Christian.

 

To find more about us have a look at the practices of such churches as the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, or other Anabaptist based churches.

[jimbms]

Ok WSAG I am voting with the fucking loon option.

[Evil Goblin]

China - wherever did you get the idea that the God of Exodus, etc. should be a kindly being? He was a right sod! Maybe no bad thing in those days for keeping a wandering tribe in some sort of decent order. The beneficient God the Father is a much later creation.

 

It is also appropriate to remember that the provisions of the Law relating to, amongst other things, slaves are certainly a later invention, after the Israelites had conquered Caanan. When wandering in the Sinai they would be unlikely to have had many, if any, slaves/bondsmen and the development of specific rules for treating them is much more likely to date from later on in Caanan.

Evil Goblin, I am just questioning Christians who tell me God is all loving kindly etc - I have no evidence what so ever for this, and when these same Christians point to the Bible as the inspired word of God I look at it and agree with you.

 

The point is I suspect neither you or I beleive in this supernatural entity - while the Christians do. They believe God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omnipresent, unchanging etc and they seem not to be able to see the irony in this beleif when it is contrasted with the bible.

 

And please the evidence the Jews came out of Egypt doesn't exist - The archaeology points very much to Jewish culture developing indigineously within Caanan - villages without pig bones! The only source for them wandering Sinai is the book we are discussing which is not a reliable guide to either history or an unchanging God.

Hi China - weekend again so I have some time to get back to you on a few things.

 

You are right in your second paragraph - it is not only contrasting their beliefs with the Bible that should cause them problems, but also comparing their beliefs to the real world.

 

I quite agree that there is no positive evidence that the Exodus, at least as is set out in Exodus, ever actually happened. However, it may well be the case that something of the sort did happen - why else create all this story about some Israelites leaving Egypt, wandering around the Sinai wilderness for a while, then entering Caanan? On an Occams Razor principle surely the simplest answer is that the tale has some elements of truth behind it, especially as it contains reference to what were considered supernatural events which we now know are actual natural events. Thimgs such as villages without pigs do not provide evidence for development of a Jewish culture purely within Caanan. It is difficult sorting everything out in the Pentateuch, as by the time it was all set down in writing lots of things which had evolved over at least 5 or 6 centuries were conflated into one work as if they had all happened more or less together.

[Evil Goblin]

LDV - the idea of Hell (or Gehenna) was not new to Jesus. In any case, it did not refer to a physical Hell (which was really an invention of the Church in later years for frightening people into obedience) but to a mental Hell within a person which would result from their behaving badly i.e. Jesus was pointing out what he saw as a psychological fact.

 

I do not think you can call Jesus a fraudster - he honestly believed in what he taught and that the eventual Kingdom would involve all those who heard his words and obeyed the will of God. It is highly debatable that he thought of himself as Divine - that idea seems to later have been one in the minds of his disciples and followers.

Evil Goblin I really think this is you giving your interpretation of what Hell is and not Christ's. Jesus's rhetoric is profoundly millenial and supernatural. It is all about judgement after death.

 

Are you really going to say the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is about psychology - why then are both Lazarus and the rich man dead?

 

Link

 

The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.

CH - Matthew 5 is concerned with spiritual teaching on how people ahould behave - they should not just obey the letter of the law but also its' spirit (a typical Jesus attack on the Sadducees and the Pharisees who stressed the importance of obeying the letter of the Law). The imprecations relating to Hell are typical hyperbole to make a point of the importance of the teaching, much as the teachings on the supreme importance of faith elsewhere are emphasised by being conveyed in miracle stories.

 

Luke 16 is again spiritual teaching, this time on materialism and mercy. Although Luke 16 vv19-31 is a parable it is believed to be a rehash of a Folk Tale in which the attitudes of the Pharisees are being attacked and the importance of mercy and care for others is stressed, as usual in hyperbolic language. The fact that it is a parable indicates that it is wrong to interpret it literally - the meaning behind the story is what is important. Although typical of Jesus' teachings, the fact that it comprises an attack on the Pharisees attitudes could well indicate that the parable does not go back to Jesus himself but is an invention of the evangelist (the main enmity between the Jewish Christians and the Pharisees appears not to have developed until after 70AD).