What do masons think and how do they feel about Intelligent Design?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

Almost.
Works in horseshoes and nuclear weapons.

Almost just right.

You said that and I addressed it already


Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Re: slight "flaw" or apparent imperfection (yet very nearly absolutely "perfect")

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

The God Theory

"The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249274834&sr=8-1

Haisch is an astrophysicist whose professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Deputy Director for the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, and Visiting Fellow at the Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. His work has led to close involvement with NASA; he is the author of over 130 scientific papers; and was the Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal for nine years, as well as the editor in chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

an excerpt

If you think of white light as a metaphor of infinite, formless potential, the colors on a slide or frame of film become a structured reality grounded in the polarity that comes about through intelligent subtraction from that absolute formless potential. It results from the limitation of the unlimited. I contend that this metaphor provides a comprehensible theory for the creation of a manifest reality (our universe) from the selective limitation of infinite potential (God)...

If there exists an absolute realm that consists of infinite potential out of which a created realm of polarity emerges, is there any sensible reason not to call this "God"? Or to put it frankly, if the absolute is not God, what is it? For our purposes here, I will identify the Absolute with God. More precisely I will call the Absolute the Godhead. Applying this new terminology to the optics analogy, we can conclude that our physical universe comes about when the Godhead selectively limits itself, taking on the role of Creator and manifesting a realm of space and time and, within that realm, filtering out some of its own infinite potential...

Viewed this way, the process of creation is the exact opposite of making something out of nothing. It is, on the contrary, a filtering process that makes something out of everything. Creation is not capricious or random addition; it is intelligent and selective subtraction. The implications of this are profound.

If the Absolute is the Godhead, and if creation is the process by which the Godhead filters out parts of its own infinite potential to manifest a physical reality that supports experience, then the stuff that is left over, the residue of this process, is our physical universe, and ourselves included. We are nothing less than a part of that Godhead - quite literally.

More @ Brilliant Disguise: Light, Matter and the Zero-Point Field.(MUST READ!)

But Phage, we don't have to have the very same debate all over again, over here, do we? Like I said, I was looking for some like-minded people with which to share some ideas about intelligent design without coming under attack by people with a strong atheist agenda. C'mon. Please? Why can't I talk to and share ideas with Masons about ID what's wrong with that?

And by perfect reflection, it's the same visible circumference, not as it was in ancient ancient earth history when the moon was 12 times as large in the sky, but the same visible diameter as the sun, now, now during this present epoch in time and in earth's evolutionary history when there are human observers to see it, to notice it, and for some, for those who choose, assign a meaning and a significance to it (where others may choose not to if they prefer to think of it as nothing but a blind chance coincidence, that's their right and priviledge)..

We can agree to disagree fine, no problem, but I wouldn't mind being able, being free to find some like-minded people with whom to share these ideas, without being put to ridicule by the perceived scientific-astronomical kingpin of ATS. Can you understand that? Have a little respect is all I'm asking I guess, nothing more.

Regards,

NAM

edit on 13-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Can you understand that? Have a little respect is all I'm asking I guess, nothing more.
I understand. You only want to hear from those who don't contradict you.

Guess what? Wrong website.

edit on 6/13/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

No again you're assuming.

Of course Masons are interested in intelligent design or evidence of intelligent design along with the ancient building and measuring science of the Masons of old (Egyptians).

I'm also wanting to actually test the things I feel I've discovered and am discovering and hold those maps of reality out for the consideration of others, people who are open-minded towards new possibilities some of which they might not have run across or considered before. It's just a matter of common courtesy, please don't assume and project on me thanks.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:51 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

You start a new thread stating exactly the same things you did in your other thread(s) and expect it to be ignored because it's in a different forum?



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:57 AM
link   
Just some interesting info I've been running across researching this idea of ID, of which I've been finding more and more, much of which I haven't even shared yet on ATS.

You think you can just storm in on me and put me and my ideas to ridicule? What for? In your opinion there can BE NO SUCH THING AS Intelligent Design under ANY circumstances, I understand that and "get" your position on this issue. Anyway, go ahead have at it...

I can't ask for or stifle your free speech either I get that too.

Have I earned no respect from you at all?

You do see what I'm posting and offering up as ideas for consideration, so you can't just call me a whack job and ask everyone to believe you, and even if you could, is that fair? Is it reasonable?



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


You think you can just storm in on me and put me and my ideas to ridicule?
I don't think I have subjected you to ridicule. Pointing out your errors and lapses of logic do not, to my mind anyway, constitute ridicule.



Have I earned no respect from you at all?

You're very persistent. How's that?



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by IslandMason
If you're not one who believes the geological fossil record is false or "put here by Satan to fool us", then you can see that the fossil record conclusively shows the slow changes over time.


Why would Satan put fossils there to fool us? It does not matter whether we believe in Creation or Evolution. This is not a criterion on which we will be judged on the last day, so I hardly think it would be worth the effort by Satan.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saurus

Why would Satan put fossils there to fool us? It does not matter whether we believe in Creation or Evolution. This is not a criterion on which we will be judged on the last day, so I hardly think it would be worth the effort by Satan.


I'm referring to the "young earthers". If you bring up the fossil record as proof that the world is more than 6000 years old, many will just tell you those fossils are the devil's work, put here to make us doubt the true age of the earth, that those animals never existed. Of course it's untrue, but a small detail like truth never stopped anyone from preaching fallacy.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by IslandMason
 


I don't think anyone here, or anything in this thread has to do with young earth creationism.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Based on the information I've been presenting, it's a lapse of logic to presume that such a configuration is a random chance occurrence and does not show the hallmarks of an intelligent creative agency who's aim and purpose was/is the very life we are living today.

In your "opinion" based on your worldview and paradigm maybe it doesn't appear to be based in sound reasoning and logic, but you're not even willing to take a look at it from another perspective and POV, simply because of the implications of that viewpoint (ID).

But why would anyone be biased for a random purposeless and meaningless universe, especially when that meaning and purpose is staring them straight in the face?

What's so scary about the idea that an infinite intelligence of a creative agency is at cause, especially when the data points in that direction? I don't get it, the degree of bias and prejudice involved, in atheism.

Anyway, you don't take severe flak like I have over this info (all by atheists) unless you're over the target.

Onwards and upwards..

NAM

edit on 13-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by IslandMason
 


I don't think anyone here, or anything in this thread has to do with young earth creationism.


You're right. However, if you actually read the thread a few posts ago, you'll see I made a passing reference, and someone asked for clarification...



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

You got six stars for that post. Strange..

Oh well, I was simply trying to share some interesting observations with people that I thought might have an appreciation for it.

edit on 13-6-2013 by NewAgeMan because: typo



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by Phage
 

You got six stars for that post. Strange..


Phage apparently got these stars for pointing out the lapses in your logic, in his own words. There is nothing strange in that. It appears that six people found his arguments superior. So do I.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Which arguments specifically?



posted on Jul, 2 2013 @ 10:13 PM
link   


It's the Flower of Life, the Generative Principal of Male/Female.

Intelligent Design by Conscious Design and the originating movement of consciousness on the "waters" of the void.

"Let there be light!"

edit on 2-7-2013 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2013 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

I just don't see it, not the concept, but the design.



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

I just don't see it.

That's interesting..



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Did I hear disrespect, insults, and ridicule? I'll make you wish you were talking to Phage.

You should be ready to defend your beliefs not run away like a scared child. No religion and no belief deserves respect... they should stand or fall on their own merits.



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 

You'd have to run through the original thread and info presented to see what I'm presenting, which does and will continue to stand on it's own merit, although that doesn't mean that it won't be contested, denied, put to ridicule, and hey when you're over the target a little flak is to be expected and new ideas and new discoveries are always met that way, at first.

Deny ignorance.

edit on 5-7-2013 by NewAgeMan because: typo



posted on Jul, 5 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 

I'm not seeing a pattern to make the overlay of the square and compass on the flower of life.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join