It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Religion causes otherwise moral people to do and say immoral things.

page: 6
3
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


nimrod, who was the akkadian enmerkar, the assyrian asir, and the egpytian narmer and osiris, rebuilt the e.abzu and reopened the gate of god, there. the gate of god, was the abzu gate of enki.

enki and enlil had a few disagreements about humans, as the story of reproduction and sin, indicate. to me, that text indicates that enki agreed to nimrod rebuilding the gate temple and digging up the gate, which had been buried under 8 ft of flood silt from the black sea flood. then enki brought other races thru the gate, who had different languages and cultures than the people who were there already, and this influx of new languages and cultures, caused the confusion. the text in this part is VERY brief. alot briefer than the english translation, which added alot of additional words to get the original hebrew words to make sense to english readers, some 3000 years later.

enki appears to have been the one that oversaw the production of the atum clones originally, and later made the reproduction alteration, which caused us to fall out of favor with enlil. he also appears to have saved humans from the "flood weapon", as it was called in the epic of gilgamesh. he has a habit of rescuing/saving humans from enlil's wrath, perhaps because he engineered us or took part in the process, in the first place?. sound like anyone you've heard of ?




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


If i'm honest... no. It's pretty much the same recycled story that has passed through many religions in different ways. It still doesn't answer my questions. As i've said, i'm more than willing to look into this "theory" but it doesn't rebut my argument against an omnipotent creator of reality.
edit on 14/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


well, define omnipotent.

i think they're interdimensional beings. as the one pdf file i linked you to, "What is an Elohim?" explains, they are spirit beings. so are you. it's just that you are currently wearing a fleshy encounter suit.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


You believe in evolution, right?



As you've probably noticed words like "fleshy suites" and "spirit beings" just that don't cut the mustard when it comes to my sceptical mind.
edit on 14/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


micro evolution, yes. macro, no.
there are multiple dimensions, some of which are probably better explained by mr. sagan



i believe the ancient texts from all over the ancient world, are trying to describe interdimensional beings and they give them various names



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


You believe in micro evolution but not macro evolution?

So you believe small changes over short periods can occur but large changes over a long period of time do not occur? Doesn't make sense, have you ever read any of Richard Dawkin's work? (i know i know Atheist poster boy, but really he is a great micro evolutionary biologist)

4th dimension, currently this is an abtract idea, it's based on ideological matematics, It's not a truth, it's like a multiverse theory, it's undemonstratable BUT it's founded using mathematics or at least with a goal of trying to reason our reality.

Some of these are considered scientific "metaphysical" theories. These theories should be no means equated with religion or claims to a omnipotent dictator, there is no math involved, just speculation without reason.

Carl Sagan is an agnostic, "he doesn't know" Therefore he is an atheist in regards to every (so far) man made religion. Bless his soul. Let me get this straight, he is no creationist.



Peace.

And please, i'm trying to open your mind as i'm sure your goal is to open mine.
edit on 15/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


it's like the double slit experiment. everything is in super position until it's observed in 3d, and then it behaves differently. i don't think sagan was into metaphysics?

as far as micro vs. macro. i believe lots of little changes can happen to the same species, but i don't believe the changes cause the species to become something else without artificial intervention.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


That's what we call speciation, macro evolution causes this, large changes over time.



The double slit experiment doesn't imply God and it works without that implication.
edit on 15/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


you're not addressing the right part of the statement, as far as i can tell. i was responding to what you said about multidimensions being a metaphyiscs topic. yet sagan was not into metaphysics as far as i know.

it seems what we have here are some parts of science being accepted by you because it supports your world view, and other parts, regretted because it doesn't support your world view, which is what i'm doing as well. i don't think macro evolution is correct, but i do believe in multidimensions, black holes, wormholes, micro evolution, and various other kinds of science.


edit on 15-1-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


As i have already said, there are such things as scientific metaphysical theory. The 4th dimension cannot be proved, nor can the Multiverse theory, although their existence cannot be verified by demonstrate or observation, the theories are a product of mathematical/logical rationalisation.

Other metaphysical theories such as Heaven, Hell, an omnipotent dictator, "spirit world" are NOT formed using mathematical rationalisation, they have been "conjured". There is no logic here other than "This world has been created by something intelligent because i can't understand any other way how it could exist"

You have tried time and time again to justify the ancient scriptures and the omnipotent deity theory by simply pointing to blackholes or attempting to explain wormhole theory, Again this is not evidence of a "GOD" - No scientist so far has claimed that this stands in contention of a God, whether it is written in modern scientific books or ancient scriptures.

Again you have not addressed the question of "defining" God, you simply point to phenemomen that scientists already know about, if "GOD" theory was that convincing, people would have written hypothesis regarding this. Look up Pantheism, ask yourself a few questions about what you really think about God, what really is your position.

Please address my main arguments here as we seem to be going in circles here.

AGAIN, Agnostic Atheism is the lack of the belief in a deity because DESPITE all of our information regarding astronomy, philosophy, matehmatics, acheaology......no argument, no theory so far has been convincing enough to warrant a belief. Now you keep avoiding this fact and quoting an ancient scripture.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


well the premise is, that first off, we have a text that's quite ancient (the book of enoch), describing a super massive black hole. that alone suggests there's alot more going on, even that long ago and considering enoch was one of the direct descendants of noah (pre-flood), who was also in the lineage of yeshua (jesus), i think it's relevant. i don't know why you don't think so, but i'm willing to accept that you don't

i try to use my common sense, logic, reason and comparative, artistic skill, to analyze these things. i might be completely wrong, but at this point, the evidence seems to be accumulating in my favor.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Again, i'm arguing against the position of an omnipotent dictator, religion and other men make the claim; the burden of proof is on them. And thankfully, so far there has been NO evidence in it's favour. The bible, the book of enoch, the dead sea scrolls all, so far, don't conclude the existence of a metaphysical dictator, even the stories they speak of are that which archaeologists find contradictory. Carry on your pursuit on elightenment i say, Aliens giving us technology or not, it still doesn't prove an omnipotent deity that created the universe and all of reality. It still doesn't prove Jesus was the son of God, it doesn't prove Mary had an immaculate conception.

Talking about blackholes and wormholes doesn't stand in your favour of a omnipotent dictator and you have yet to convince me, and scientists have been unconvinced by using the supernatural to explain natural phenomenon.

These ancient scriptures are evil preaching, and if it's history, it's lost history, there's no evidence to verify any of the claims, and most are contradictory to current evidence we have.
edit on 16/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


since you've entertained the notion that they might be extra-terrestrials, i'd like to point out that strictly speaking, that would be true by virtue of the fact, the texts don't claim the gods come from earth but from heaven or the heavens (and as i proved earlier, the word "heaven" can be the starry expanse and/or the abode of the gods or even the atmosphere in which things fly,).

i'd put my thoughts on it together in a numbered list, but i don't think it's going to do much good at this point because we've went from you believing the texts might be speaking of real miracles, to suggesting they are fairy tales written by humans (and at least part of that answer is true-- they were written by humans).



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Miracles by definition is the temporary suspension of the natural order. I don't believe this is possible; Mary may not have been touched by a male, it could have been a biologically anomoly, i'll grant that, it's no miracle, but it still doesn't prove Jesus was the son of invisible sky being who made and controlled the Earth.

And yes, i am willing to entertain your interpretations and it could have been Aliens who visited earth but the metaphysical claim of an omnipotent being is still unanswered. If you think they are "GOD's" themselves then say so, but then who made them?

Please i don't take this Annunaki business seriously. there's little evidence to believe in it but i'm willing to entertain it providing theres a vast ammount of evidence that points in it's favour. I appreciate that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


temporary suspension of the natural order as we currently understand it.

i'll reiterate my position: 1) blackholes, wormholes, in conjunction with technology capable of generating the same, were originally associated with the "gods" because the gods were "born" from them. this is not my words, but the words of the ancient people. 2) science is showing that the galaxies were created by super massive black holes, which at least one ancient person saw first hand (enoch). 3) at the center of super massive black holes, is the singularity where the natural order goes right off the charts so my current theory is, that this singularity is an entrance to another dimension, which exists outside space time as we know it in our third dimensional reality, and which more than temporarily suspends the natural order.

that's a very brief recap of my position on the subject, generally speaking.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


These black holes might well lead to another dimension but i would refrain myself from guessing as no human so far as been able to get close to one, nor do we know the consequences it if a human could get near.

Multiverse theory is a thriving arena of discussion in metaphysics. It could be that reality is a closed-loop Matrix where everything is interconnected, and black holes are gateways to other universes, who knows! We can only guess. Even if aliens did see it and describe it to humans, you can't prove they knew what was beyond. This is my position against your position.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


well the next part (which you don't mention, probably because you don't believe it?) is that the beings who come out of it (and in the case of epic of gilgamesh, genetically modified humans can apparently survive the trip) do describe various aspects of what's in heaven, in this case, an abode that's both up in the sky and all around us although we can't see it (much like the flatlanders couldn't understand 3dimensionality in the sagan video).



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Again that was an idea, of course we can't demonstrate that flatliners actually exist, it's a metaphysical theory like the Multiverse.

Of course although your theory MAY be true, it's no better than my theory that states it's a closed-loop Matrix. We are both in the same position, we're agnostic, we are unable to demonstrate our theories as is the bible unable to demonstrate it's claims to "TRUTH".

What do you honestly think is beyond it? Do you think some super 4d race is going to come to Earth and save us from the impending doom we face he in this area of the universe? I don't get how you have come up with your theory? No theologian, scientist, historian could ever assert these claims which you state as theory.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by awake_and_aware
 


what do i believe, you ask. i believe pretty much what the various ancient texts say. particularly the bible, which i use as a sieve thru which to sift the rest of the ancient texts. in this manner, i've found all kinds of addtional information about the ancient world. i didn't always feel this way, as i use to think other ancient texts were all fables and myth and only the bible was real. now i see it differently, although with some provisos.

i've had personal experiences in this regard, that leads me to be convinced that yeshua was real, that the bible and many other ancient texts are telling the truth in various ways. i know your personal position cannot accept this and. i can't change that, i can only discuss it with you. and that's what i'm doing.

it's like having a discussion with a person who says they had an unique experience. you can either believe them or not, that part is up to you. not much the person could do other than suggest you try to have a similar experience to prove it to yourself.

i'm not agnostic



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


So you're a gnostic theist, after previously regarding the scripture of fable and myth. Let me ask, what knowledge have you come across to warrant your own belief system? Whether it be a "personal experience" or empirical evidence?

The way i see it there's a few choices.

Agnostic Atheism - "I don't have the knowledge to assert a belief in a Deity"

Gnostic Atheism - "I know for certain that there is no God"

Agnostic Theism - "I don't have the knowledge to say for sure that scripture speaks truth, but i have enough "faith" to assert a belief"

Gnostic Theism - "I know for certain that there is an omnipotent God, and i know that scripture speaks the truth"

I myself consider myself Agnostic in regards to a creator, but when it comes to the God of scripture, i can safely say that i am a Gnostic Atheist, as no "entity" is intervening in human affairs, and scripture says this is so, it is incorrect. Volcanoes and earthquakes are not "GOD".

Of course you can't change my mind, because i, like you previously, consider the bible and scripture to be ancient myth like Zeus. I don't think any personal experience or revised study of the scripture could change my mind.

Again i ask what convinced you? What did it take to convince you, THIS IS THE TRUTH, there is a GOD.?
edit on 16/1/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join