Just read this on Facebook, about God and Einstein.

Originally posted by Quickfix
God is the sun, for without it there would be no life on this planet.

That's the true religion...

~Q

Yea, but too much of it, and there would be no life on this planet..

That's kinda weird to have "too much god".

Originally posted by vjr1113

Originally posted by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
reply to post by Adyta

 

Many would argue that there would have never been the development of society if it wasn't for religion...

That's not to say, that I don't agree with the notion that it should be removed as term often used to denote ones philosophy and standard of morality, or even allegiance.

I just think a little more respect for the texts should be given, for their depth and transcendent qualities are absolutely amazing. The authors of the thing were soooooooo genius, that it almost justifies a claim to being the 'word of god'. Although that's most likely not the case.

nah you give it too much credit. theres instructions for slavery and ownership of women in there. if you've read it you'd know how sick that book is. there's many philosophers from around that time and later that deserve much more credit than that book.

like who?

In the order of Socrates, Plato, Xenophon Aristotle and so forth?

Well... spoiler alert!

Those very philosophies are the very construct of the New Testament.

And later....

Like who?
Friedrich Nietzsche who spent a majority of his career bashing Christianity... who then went insane/crazy and was left to ruins(physically and mentally), and ramblings about God?

Oh and btw... maybe consider, that at the time of its creation SLAVERY WAS A SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE MEANS.

reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS


im not buying that they wrote the new testament.

i also dont buy relative morality. slavery is wrong, it always was and it always will be.

Originally posted by vjr1113
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

 

im not buying that they wrote the new testament.

i also dont buy relative morality. slavery is wrong, it always was and it always will be.

good thing you are not buying it, because I'm not selling it!

I'm saying that their works are the foundation for it, not that they participated directly in its creation. Their beliefs and reasoning means were adopted. So was greek mythology such as the parallels between Jesus and Dionysus...

Even the 'conspiracy' that Jesus traveled to India is straight out of the Dionysian playbook. Then there is the whole connection with astronomy, which I suppose can be correlated with that of 'Astrology' and celestial religions of the time... which then gives you my name on this site...

MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS...

ever wonder why Aliester Crowley chose the name for his book.... The Equinox of The Gods? You wonder where 5 bread and 2 fish came from? Think about Pisces...
I'm done... sorry for ranting out of context on this thread....

6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. Ask, Seek, Knock 7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Do your research, and make your own mind up...

EDIT: You don't buy 'relative morality'...

How do you think cognition works, especially that of the development of cognitive bias... There is an evolution to the progression of thought.

A cognitive bias is a pattern of deviation in judgment that occurs in particular situations, leading to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.

The bias towards slavery was a construct of a lack in reasoning... and an unfortunate product of intrinsic value that had been developed...

The days of tribal tribulations was undoubtedly a precursor, and means for justifying slavery. This was before the time of any real 'critical' thinking, for even their language didn't allow for this to be done.

There is such a thing as 'relative morality', everything is relative.. and relative to the times, and the moment of progression in developed reasoning in regards to morality of societal structure, yes slavery was seeing as a morally acceptable means.

I left a lot out, but should suffice...

reply to post by Lionhearte


If there was "too much god" as you stated we wouldn't be here in the first place.

There wouldn't be life here, or there would and it would be a lot different.

People have worshiped the sun for centuries knowing what it does.

paganwiccan.about.com...

It really is not a hard concept.

Life is beginning to be discovered in other places like the recent Mars thread or more habitable planets.

From here on out there won't be less discoveries of life in other places besides Earth, it will only grow, and likely exponentially now that people are searching for it. (I wonder what "God" has to say about microbial aliens, its not mentioned in the bible.)

reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS


kay then it is their work that deserves the credit, not the bible.

Crowley was a sad pathetic man. he doesnt matter

Originally posted by vjr1113
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS

 

kay then it is their work that deserves the credit, not the bible.

Crowley was a sad pathetic man. he doesnt matter

edit on 16-4-2012 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)

I agree that he took it too far, Crowley was an incredible person none the less. His knowledge could, would, and did leave even the best of scholars looking for a pen and pad.

Bash the book all you want, I just respect the genius that created it. Even if it does contain 'old' ideals and values, I'd have to say the parables that Jesus left us with were pretty spot on as far as philosophical reasoning goes...

Einstein wasn't an atheist. Its just that he wasn't a Christian.......

---------------------------------

A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. (Albert Einstein)

I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. (Albert Einstein)

The most beautiful and most profound experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive forms - this knowledge, this feeling is at the center of true religiousness.
( Albert Einstein - The Merging of Spirit and Science)

Source

reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS


jesus was over rated, nothing special to him, look up musonius rufus.

edit: i mean he demanded that ppl abandon their families and follow him for example. not the most moral of things

read up on crowleys life, the guy ate feces and failed to summon any demons.

Einstein was a FRAUD, and worked in a patent office, and was put into place by the bloodlines, as an "expert" and the science he used was false dogma, that has brought earth to the brink of destruction through their exploitation of the resources and all of us.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Einstein was a FRAUD, and worked in a patent office, and was put into place by the bloodlines, as an "expert" and the science he used was false dogma, that has brought earth to the brink of destruction through their exploitation of the resources and all of us.

Oh my..., for real?

Do you have a link to some crazy documentary that you watched that has lead you down rabbit hole?

Understand Hume and Locke, and you understand Einstein...

He worked in a patent office, because his former friend told his old man about him and gave him a job. The entire time, Einstein was tying to get a teaching job, but nobody would hire him.

He wasn't at the time an 'expert', but he eventually became one.

You want to know the key to Einsteins success... reasoning, and critical thinking. He even started little groups, and held meetings in which they held deep conversations about relating topics....

In fact, his first theories weren't even correct LOL. Not even close... well close, but yeah...

Also, he wasn't the only person to help in the development of Nuclear Weapons... in '33 he even made comments about how much he hated war. He was talked into helping develop the technology because the US was told that the NAZIS were already on their way to making on themselves.

What, was Leo Slizard also a part of this bloodline? LOL

Although it is kinda funny if you think about what people claim, in regards of reptilian bliggidy blah blah and the bloodline, then to look at the name Leo Slizard.

Oh no, I think I just added more fuel to Unity's fire!

Originally posted by Unity_99
Einstein was a FRAUD, and worked in a patent office, and was put into place by the bloodlines, as an "expert" and the science he used was false dogma, that has brought earth to the brink of destruction through their exploitation of the resources and all of us.

www.npr.org...

You are delusional.

Now, you may not respect or relate to the link I'm going to give, for this physicist, who has more credentials and awards than most would ever dream of, and who participated in Princeton University, Engineering Anomalies, which yielded many interesting results, has given some factoids, that can be independently looked up.

And they're born out by facts.

So, here is a very good article, getting into the heart of science, and its tendency to run with favorite dogma's, ie, they are priests at the alter of falacies, things not born out by experimental results, or having evidence. And due to this horrible abuse of intellectual material, science and learning, we live in a hijacked world that is massively exploited by criminals.

www.levashov.info...

I recommend reading this in full.

And researching the independent info found in there, including his employment, whose theories he "lifted". ie. the nobel prize was rigged, and the real scientists were not going to give him the prize for a theory they knew he stole, so they awarded him with something else, that they didn't mind stealing from a Russian or Eastern Scientist. Nice, eh?

We've been had, played and exploited, and he was very much AWARE.

As the article goes into depth about.

I don't have much time but will give a few interesting links after the main one.

www.levashov.info...

Unfortunately, we can’t say this about the postulates of isotropy of the Universe and the speed of light. It was these two postulates that were the foundation of Einstein’s General and Special Relativity Theories. I should like to introduce some clarity into this matter. Apart from whether this theory is correct or not, it would be wrong to consider Albert Einstein its author.



The fact is that Einstein, while employed in a patent bureau, simply «borrowed» these ideas from two scientists: a mathematician/physicist Jules Henri Poincare and a physicist Hendrik Antoon Lorentz. These two scientists had collaborated for several years on this theory. It was Poincare who introduced the postulates of the isotropy (homogeneity) of the Universe and the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum, and it was Lorentz who devised his famous formulas pursuant to his work on the ether drift.



Einstein, working then in the patent bureau, had access to their scientific research and decided to "jot down" their theory in his name. He even kept the name of Hendrik Antoon Lorentz in "his" Relativity Theory, by naming the basic mathematical formulas of "his" theory the "Lorentz transformations". How-ever, he did not specify what role he (Einstein) had in these formulas (none); also, he even refrained from mentioning the name of Poincare, who introduced the postulates. In spite of all this he, for some "reason", gave this theory his own name.



Everyone knows that Einstein is a Nobel Prize laureate and believes that he won this prize for creating the General and Special Relativity Theories. But this is not so. The scandal around these theories, though known only in narrow scientific circles, prevented the Nobel Committee from awarding him a purse for them.

More links to follow

Did he work at a patent agency. Well apparently yes he did!

www.ige.ch...

journals.cambridge.org...

Whose theories did he lift?

Well: mathematician/physicist Jules Henri Poincare and a physicist Hendrik Antoon Lorentz.

Google this.

Whose theory did he lift to get his nobel prize, or did they conspire to find a work around, becasue some Bloodline PTB wanted this to occur, so they could manipulate our matrix and control all science:

www.levashov.info...

Instead, they found a very simple way out: Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize for discovery of the second law of the photoelectric effect, which was a particular case of the first law of the photoelectric effect. It is of interest, that Russian physicist Alexander Grigorievich Stoletov (1830-1896), who dis-covered the photoelectric effect, did not receive a Nobel Prize, or any other prize for his discovery. Yet Einstein won it for the "study" of a particular case of this law of physics.

learnedrussian.com...

They also have some wiki's on him which I can't get to load fast enough for my time, and have had my computer and internet shut off today, with phone and tv, for posting something, at least that is what I think. It happened just after the post, and when it finally was coming back, it was loading youtube, and when I did a fast switch to ATS in the bookmark, off everything went again.

And now let us look at what the facts tell us.

On the one hand, we have the Michelson-Morley’s experiments, which altogether were performed for 6 hours, during 4 days, with 36 turns of the interferometer.

And on the other hand, we have experimental data recorded by the interferometer over a period of 24 years, with the device being turned 12,000 times! At the same time, Miller’s interferometer was 3 times more sensitive! These are the facts.

But perhaps Einstein and Co. were unaware of these results, or they didn’t read scientific journals and remained deluded? They perfectly well knew everything. Dayton Miller wrote letters to Einstein. In one of them he reported on his work of 22 years that confirmed the presence of an ether drift. Einstein replied very skeptically and demanded proofs, which were given to him, whereupon there was no answer forthcoming.
We can understand why there was no answer after they had received Miller’s experimental data. However, the most curious thing is that the positive results about the ether drift were registered even in the earlier Michelson-Morley’s experiments, but were "simply" ignored. After Miller’s death in 1941, his work was "simply" forgotten; nobody has ever published it in scientific journals—as if this scientist never existed. But he was one of the greatest American physicists.

All of the above clearly show that the concepts about the nature of the Universe were intentionally imposed upon mankind to steer the development of civilization from the correct path. The reason is that those backing Einstein feared losing their power and position. They feared that the true knowledge, if re-leased, would inevitably unmask them and reveal to everyone their true face and true intention.

Now here is a man who fully deserved the NOBEL PRIZE and was a REAL SCIENTIST:

www.orgonelab.org...

The other is not exactly who the world makes him out to be.

That we don't have a true meaning for the word cold, other than the absence of heat. No I kinda don't agree, yes we can perceive this as such, but doesn't mean that it's so, It can get so cold that we can Burn to death, So cold that it can rapidly boil and shard your bloodstream then generate enough friction that you'll shatter.

darkness, well we have all kinds of meanings for that, none of which truly is just about it being absence of light, We measure blackhole, Metaphorical darkness, and just far more that these two conclusions can be swelled upon in such a religious rhetoric.

You wanna believe in something, that's great, do such, but do such because YOU discovered it, not because it sounds good.

Answers have always been inside us, we are just always :
too loud to hear it, too big to see it, and too fast to feel it.

Originally posted by treesandwoods
Remember there was a thread on ATS before about this alleged convo, but that one claimed the student was a famous Indian Rocket Scientist. Can't remember his name.

"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. "

I doubt Science depends on the opinion of a few people who are not tangential to a certain field of it. I can easily find 1000 people in my town who have never felt, touched or smelt the planet Mars, which certainly is not going to invalidate the existence of the planet. And since when "Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol" depends on the anecdotal opinion/experience of a few people in the audience?

edit on 16-4-2012 by treesandwoods because: (no reason given)

There is evidence for God's existence, and there are many people who know this who just happen to not be ATS members. If more people used the scientific method to determine for themselves God's existence, then we'd be getting somewhere, but so far people are content to rely on the theories of others as their evidence. Like einstein said, "The only source of knowledge is experience."

All you would have to do is crack the professors head open, see, and touch brain. It no doubt exists.



It's not like we can hop on a rocket and fly to heaven.



Dumb story that will be shatt on all day.


You should just let people believe in something. That's what makes us human.



Sure there is evil. We make it evil. Man makes it evil. God let's us make it evil.

That's called free will.

Those are the rules.

You don't have to follow. You don't have to even play.

You don't have to believe in jack.


So in the end. When we die. It's either...

1. Nothing

2. Heaven

3. Hell


So I would rather believe in God and maybe get to Heaven.

If the final answer is "Nothing".

It won't even matter. Because I won't even know.

Whether Einstein himself ever said that is really not the point.

For the poster calling him an Atheist... that is not so. Research it... he didn't understand the Atheist mind, therefore he was not an Atheist. He didn't believe in some bearded old man sitting up in space/heaven judging us down here... but definitely not an atheist.

The quoted OP is a dialogue that I have seen before. Its a good argument for the atheist and the believer.

You either believe or you don't.

I believe.

So be it.

reply to post by onequestion


S&F for the good read. My best friend and I yesterday had a long talk of his view on faith and my take on divine dichotomy. I just wanted to share that I enjoyed your thread and will not discuss my views on the topic with any ATS members, Its my "personal" beliefs for a reason