God and us.......

Though if the towers that be responsible for all of the horror do no agree to sit down and discuss the past/future, they must be rounded up, prosecuted.....and either condemned to prison for life or executed in mass immediately.
There are no other 'solutions'.

There are No more excuses.
You know this.
Act or suffer, then die.


I have nothing else to say/write on this site or another.
Done.
I've 'done' what "I" could.
It's up to U.
*God Bless* or not.

reply to post by Bluemoonsine

are you speaking about TPTB ! the only solution is people awareness. when soldiers know that they are fighting for...... not humanity and when people prefer humanity to money. and when we all understand that a factory releases the guidance of a machine with it. and humanity is not an exception. Humanism is a vicious circle and it is sentenced to corruption !

reply to post by maes2


Folks got along fine for thousands of years without the dole-ar.....with a barter system and 'real currency' such as various denominations of gold and silver to settle uneven barters.
Self suffiicient communities complemented with 'guildes of specialties' and local leadership with accountability; down>up mangagement concept.
Coupled with modern day technology and sharing of tasks within the community will free up much much time for one to Be as only they could while respecting themselves and neighbors at the same time. Organic food with spring water to maintain a strong immune system without man-made toxins. Cancer is a modern epidemic and subsequence of the eugenics movement as a bowel movement at that. What a waste of life; Of creation.

It really does 'take a village' and besides, it's one's neighbors that can correct an individual, guide that individual, certainly Not some foreign judge, whether compromised or not, though hopefully with the jury of one's 'peers' where found. Currently, the dole-ar has divided and conquered humanity (the family unit) by design while all suffer that consequence, rich or poor, as the Creator works/punishes/rewards in mYsterious ways as a natural law to graveity. What any being yearns for is love, understanding, appreciation, fellowship and communion. Certainly no being is as an island unto themselves. Image-In being 'stationed' on a planet with one or two folks. Yes, jussst imagine how lonely one would be, especially if the folks were of the same gender. Can't 'buy' happiness; never could, would or should. Just sa^Y^in. Most follow; do as they're told without respect to the Conscience to their own demise. One knows better, few Do better. So be them? Freewill is as a blessing in disguise or as a curse in one's shadow.....
Bye buy?,
*God Bless*

reply to post by SLAYER69


You bring up some interesting points. As far as the business of how each side treats the so-called "early man" forms, well, I have a theory on that.

I grew up going to public schools, and learned all the usual stuff, including the evolution of man. As a young adult, I was reading in a National Geographic my dad had, looking at a really well done piece on that very topic. They had it all in there; nice color pictures, all the little details on every form discovered, the works. While reading it, though, and looking at the pictures and charts, I noticed something. Most of the forms seemed, well, simian. Totally simian. As in, monkeys and apes. Nothing human at all about any of them, from the stats. Only the last few, like 2-3, seemed at all human. In fact, other than being drawn with more body hair, they seemed totally human. Different relative sizes, maybe, but heck, we have groups around NOW that are pretty different. Compare, just in Africa, someone of the Mandingo tribes with a Pygmy. Looking at old bones, you might think those were not the same species at all. The Neanderthals? What makes them anything other than human? A different race, sure, but non-human? There is clear evidence of interbreeding, and even clear evidence of genetic material from Neanderthals in "modern" humans. Meaning viable offspring, meaning we are, or were, the same, save some minor characteristics. I don't think that generational changes within a species indicate that there are bigger changes from one species to an entirely different one. A race wiped out, or mostly wiped out, isn't hard to imagine. Competition for shelter, hunting grounds, and water supplies could have been enough incentive. Heck, looking different could have been enough.

From a Biblical standpoint, we are told that people were scattered, shorty after the flood, because of their disobedience at Babel. We know that regional differences can cause, over time, some changes in people, so there is no reason to think this could not have happened then as well. Scattered far and wide, with variations as a result of climate, diet, etc., and you could get some different-looking people. Coming from something like a monkey, though? Doesn't even make sense scientifically.

Besides, I have personally seen a human footprint in the same layer of rock as some verified dino prints. Not the Paluxy River ones, either. Little place, not well known for that print, but I have seen it. A few mammals in the layer, too. The owners don't even state that's what it is. They simply show it, and ask what people think. It's more shallow than the dino ones, of course, since most of theirs are from larger ones, but it's human. Not much different in size from my own foot; just a little smaller. I know how this sounds, and I would have a hard time believing it if I hadn't been there, but it's real.

Originally posted by Secret009
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

This kind of rambling is laughably simple at best and dangerously stupid at worst.


There is no god, no fictional old grey man sitting in some clouds up there. There is no afterlife. This is it. You, and everyone else, get ONE chance to live. Your faith is just that, a faith that by definition can never be proven.

Evolution is real and scientifically proven.
Creationism is nonsensical and relies on the benevolence of a divine creator.

Evolution is FAR from proven. Half the stuff they display in museums is faked, or rigged up to look differently than it actually would. Lucy is a prime example. Stuff in textbooks has been equally faked and misrepresented. Real science would not have to do that. There is no proof of evolution. No one species proven to change to a different species. Don't talk about some silly primroses, either. They are still primroses. Show me a daisy turning to a rose, or something like that, or there is NO proof.

Evolution is an unproven theory.

By the way, I have never heard one single Christian, over decades of living, describe God as some old grey-haired man in the clouds. Where Do you people get such notions?

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
reply to post by texaschick

 

It doesn't make your belief any more true simply because you chose to believe rather than had it drilled into you from a young age. You're still just as wrong as every other christian, muslim, jew etc.

When you believe without proof you are making a mistake and the proof does not come to you, you simply convince yourself you are right.

The one thing god definitely is is deniable.

It doesn't make your disbelief any more true, when you state it over and over as though you had any proof. It doesn't matter where you learned this disbelief, either. You are still just as wrong as every other person that rejects the reality of their Creator.

When you refuse to believe, no matter what proof there might be, when you state over and over that others are wrong simply because they know something you don't, that doesn't make you right.

See how that works? You can choose what you wish to believe ,and others can choose what they believe, and you don't have any more proof than you demand of them that your beliefs are the correct ones.

why didn't the Neanderthals win out? They were physically stronger, used tools and fire and had larger brains.

Simple because we were smarter than them.

You need to take in account that size alone don't mean much thing because you need take in account the complexity of the brain.

This page is very informative
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by SLAYER69


Ultimate Truth?
humans made in the image of themselves.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If one believes in in Christ Jesus, our Lord, it is a deeply, often private reason, that comes only from a moving personal experience. One should never be forced or feel obligated to share their reason for their relationship with Jesus. If one is going to provide a reason based in theology, than it is your responsibility to know what and why you believe.

A couple of you have spoken about works you have read dealing with Evolution and Creationism. The best book ever came across that answered so many questions, was Tim Keller's "Reason For God". I did a thread on this very subject and included a video of Keller speaking at Berkley. If you do not want to watch the video, the thread summarizes in detail exactly what is discussed. It was truly a learning experience for me a self proclaimed Christian. This video speaks to every religion, agnostic and atheist alike!

Slayer, I am very happy for you. Ask God to give you the wisdom you seek, He will....Belief In The Age of Skepticism


Thanks, Pax
.

reply to post by paxnatus


Try the God Delusion instead, if you want to know how mankind create their own gods and read evidence of why there is certainly no god give it a go.

Originally posted by GafferUK1981
reply to post by paxnatus

 

Try the God Delusion instead, if you want to know how mankind create their own gods and read evidence of why there is certainly no god give it a go.

Where is this evidence you speak of? If you believe there is no God, what do you place your hope in, yourself?
Read my thread "Belief in the age of skepticism" It speaks to the very notion of your flawed thinking......

Thanks,
Pax

P.S. Great thread Slayer!

reply to post by paxnatus

Where is this evidence you speak of? If you believe there is no God, what do you place your hope in, yourself?
Read my thread "Belief in the age of skepticism" It speaks to the very notion of your flawed thinking......

While I would not discount the possibility of a divine principle, I would certainly agree that there is no GOD. There is no conscious and active divine being.

Have a look at this video. Please watch the whole thing.



Again, I don't believe in a conscious and active divine being ruling this world, ready to save or condemn the souls it watches over. The above video makes a very good case about the whole prayer argument deal. You know, using "answered prayers" to prove there is a god.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Hi there! I´m also quite interested in these matters and you had some very nice points in there. I especially liked the combination between architecture (science) and the church, really nice thought.

However, there were one or two things that caught my eye that I would like to mention.

Firstly you ask why the neanderthals didn´t turn out to be the dominant race, in spite of their physical dominance and apparently bigger brains. I would like to point out the hard work of a lot of people who were and are researching this in the past. I do not think that they would have missed this. Plus if anything modern man had to use his head more often BECAUSE the neanderthals were stronger. They were forced to think.

Then you wrote: "I have a feeling that while peering at the infinitely small or infinitely large they'll find a sign of sorts hanging there that simply reads... "

Uhm, reads what? Am I missing something here?

I agree that it is quite interesting how science and religion intertwined over the years.

But then you wrote "And that everything of intelligence we find in the fossil record belongs to "Homo-Sapien - Modern man". While anything lesser belongs to the other non-homo Sapien lines. "

I have to suspect at this point that I either severely misunderstand you or that you do not seem to grasp the concept of species in general.

I also would strongly advice against trying to take genesis literally while wearing science goggles. It just doesn´t work. I do believe in god and science as well, but I do not see how a rational man could take genesis literally. I mean how do you know it is the correct creation story? Why not the hindu one? Or the buddhist one? They are big religions after all, so why should their opinion not matter?

I do agree with the end of your post though. I do think that the middleground between science and religion is the right way. I would maybe take a tad more science in the the mix though

reply to post by paxnatus


Evidence? Let's start with the proven fact of evolution over the fairytale of creationism.

The book also details religions such as cargo cults, you yourself only need to look into scientology and mormonism to see how religions can begin. Christianity, Islam etc. is no different.

I have to admit to laughing at the irony of a christian asking for evidence but never providing any.

Why do I need to have hope in something, can't I just live my life and enjoy it? Have you considered that your so called hope is most likely false hope?

As for flawed thinking, really? My thoughts on religion are based on known evidence, yours are based on an old book known to be full of contradictions and errors. I think your thinking is flawed.

reply to post by GafferUK1981

Evidence? Let's start with the proven fact of evolution over the fairytale of creationism.

Evolution, as a theory, is incomplete.

Why do I need to have hope in something, can't I just live my life and enjoy it? Have you considered that your so called hope is most likely false hope?

Are you saying you live without hope?

I think your thinking is flawed.

reply to post by GafferUK1981


I think each of us have a different type of thinking based on information thats been received thus far and how such information is perceived.

Each "thinking" is different in its own right. How can you say anothers thinking is flawed when you have no idea whats what in the true~ reality~ of their mind?

Logic by your stand point is going to be different.

I believe in God and believe there is proof in Genesis as there is so many other creation stories that by definition are different but one can indeed find many similarities as well.

Genesis is read by me with a scientific mind. Out of void came light which to me is the Big Bang. I could go on and on about what I "believe" but its really neither here nor there because without being "me" you still would not understand where I am coming from.

We all have a mind..... build it..... and watch it manifest. This planet is a cool place to live when you notice the mystical behavior it possesses. The nature in which everything lives, dies, and the rebirth of such life in nature.

One last comment... There is nothing factual about evolution and the kicker is its taught in schools whereas kids believe its fact. It teaches them there is a "better" class of humans, which is racist in my opinion.

Inciteful post Slayer! My whole view on science and God is prove to me a Supreme Being does not exist? I have yet to see any evidence of that, because there is so much to learn about our own world and beyond. Furthermore, science deals in logic, reason, measurements, testing, and so on and so forth. We have still barely scrapped the surface about the known Universe and there is so much more we do not know. So, all of this before us was but a mere cosmic toss of the dice? Or was there a method to the madness? Just questions followed by questions?

I know one thing, our minds are finite and there is only so much material our portion of gray matter can feasibly digest. I am fairly certain Albert Einstein died with more questions than answers. If people want to believe in something in way that they can understand? More power to them. Religion and science will never be cognizant of the other, because science involves logic and reason. Where as, religion and God is a matter of faith, and that defies all logic and reason. We don't know the answers about faith as well. Why someone would believe in something that defies the five senses, but believe regardless. I am willing to designate this subject as another one of those slippery slopes.

I posted this thread to share a few thoughts of mine. I in no way meant it as a way of forcing my views on others [I hate it when people try that with me]

I purposely stayed absent from the thread to let it take it's natural course so I can gain a better understanding from those who posted their various views on the topic. I thank all of you for sharing both pro and con and all other perspectives.

I've found all of the arguments very interesting.

reply to post by Jakes51


The second law of thermodynamics states that all things tend from order to disorder over time. If this is so, then how in the world did star dust become a race of living thinking creatures who are able to contemplate the nature of the star dust from which they come?

Entropy is real. But when entropy crafts increasingly more sophisticated lifeforms...that is when you see intent. When the odds are astronomically stacked, and you still come out on top - not once, not twice, but a hundred times - that's not luck. That's not skill. That is providence.

I don't believe in a conscious superpowerful entity that created this world and is waiting to rule it again. But I do believe in what we could call a 'divine principle', a supreme law of nature that enables all other laws, and uses chaos to craft an ever greater order. That's real divinity, to me. To take negative and always, always, bring positive from it. To take the ashes of a once-beautiful world and raise a magnificent empire from the coals.

Not a god. Just a principle. A principle that gave everything in this world a chance to exist and make a difference. It doesn't have to be alive. We do all the living for it.

Originally posted by Nightaudit
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Then you wrote: "I have a feeling that while peering at the infinitely small or infinitely large they'll find a sign of sorts hanging there that simply reads... "

Uhm, reads what? Am I missing something here?

Yes, My apologies.
I was in a hurry that day and did not do a great job of proofing what I wrote and posted that paragraph out of place. JAK was nice enough to edit it for me just now. It now reads correctly.

The intent should come across a bit clearer now.