Science has given us this and God has given us what?

[MattersOfTheHeart]

John1:1 "In the beginning was the Legos . . ."

If God went on to build everything from there, how does that not make sense?


It would explain all this "interconnected" business too. :yes:


And if you take it a step further, we can resolve the whole conflict between religion and science:

Science talks about the building blocks of the material world.

The Bible talks about legos.


There ya go. Now we can all find something else to argue about.

Well this movie according to Rotten Tomatoes is being hailed as perhaps the best film of all time.
Reflecting on those rotten comments as I gaze your scholarly "connections", this may be the hand of God at work today for you sir. I believe, the RF leaders should rescind the no proselytizing rule for about 15 minutes while I be sure your souls is saved before we make the LEGO DIR.

 

[Contemplative Cat]

God gave us science. Science is Gods Will. Accepting science is a part of accepting God
But some people want to be so unbalanced lol

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

God gave us science. Science is Gods Will. Accepting science is a part of accepting God
But some people want to be so unbalanced lol

I am not really a pantheists, but I know your comment will fit many!

 

[Willamena]

However when all that is past and no longer fulfilling, we will want simply eternity filled with bliss.

And for those who already have that without god...?

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

What I am saying is that those things are subjective. What is perfection? That concept doesn't mean anything to me. Absolute truth? How do you know? It's subjective.

Oh Mr. Frankenstein, what am I going to do with you, huh?

Why do you want to know what perfection is so badly? Let it go man, move on.
Just because I know what it is, shouldn't get you down. Just let me go on being the crazy one everyone points at. Really, I don't mind.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

And for those who already have that without god...?

They too will see it for what it is one day. Though lest I begin preaching, I will say no more, than to say, this is addressed even in the book of Romans

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh Mr. Frankenstein, what am I going to do with you, huh?

Why do you want to know what perfection is so badly? Let it go man, move on.
Just because I know what it is, shouldn't get you down. Just let me go on being the crazy one everyone points at. Really, I don't mind.

 

[Willamena]

They too will see it for what it is one day. Though lest I begin preaching, I will say no more, than to say, this is addressed even in the book of Romans

Romans addresses Buddhism?

 

[Contemplative Cat]

And for those who already have that without god...?

that's probably why Buddhism exists

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

OK, I don't want you to suffer tonight while I am gone. So here goes. Ready for it?

Perfection: Perfection in the form of God, can be only one thing. It is the entirety of everything past present and future to exist that is not God, leaving only God.
Knowing what is not perfection, leads us to what is perfection.

A perfect apple is perhaps perfect among apples, but is it more perfect than a perfect orange? Of course not, which is what you eluded to with the subjective nature of perfection misunderstood.

The laymen will argue about perfection in terms of apples and oranges, and naturally end up where it appears you are. Telling people "there are no absolute truths!" etc

Where do we go from here? I explained partly the essence of perfection to you. Are you really interested in me elaborating? I don't think so, but what I do think, is like in child's baseball practices, children love to be tossed gentle pitches so they can feel big when they hit the ball. Is that what you want Mr. Frankenstein? kiss kiss

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Romans addresses Buddhism?

Yes! It does, why does that seem to surprise you?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

OK, I don't want you to suffer tonight while I am gone. So here goes. Ready for it?

Perfection: Perfection in the form of God, can be only one thing. It is the entirety of everything past present and future to exist that is not God, leaving only God.
Knowing what is not perfection, leads us to what is perfection.

A perfect apple is perhaps perfect among apples, but is it more perfect than a perfect orange? Of course not, which is what you eluded to with the subjective nature of perfection misunderstood.

The laymen will argue about perfection in terms of apples and oranges, and naturally end up where it appears you are. Telling people "there are no absolute truths!" etc

Where do we go from here? I explained partly the essence of perfection to you. Are you really interested in me elaborating? I don't think so, but what I do think, is like in child's baseball practices, children love to be tossed gentle pitches so they can feel big when they hit the ball. Is that what you want Mr. Frankenstein? kiss kiss

Well, that was a waste of time.

 

[Contemplative Cat]

Perfection is in the eyes of the beholder.
So some say perfection is attained when you have let go enough that you no longer see any imperfections. So perfection is a lack of any imperfection.

 

[Willamena]

Yes! It does, why does that seem to surprise you?

I can't say why it seems to you to surprise me.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Perfection is a lie. It's so subjective that it's a meaningless concept.

In this context? Absolutely. Perfection consists in maximal suitability to a given goal or function- if X is perfect, this means it could not be more adequate for achieving a given goal or purpose. Thus we can talk of a perfect day (for going for a walk/swimming/fishing/whatever), a perfect song (to fit our mood, our tastes, etc), or a perfect tool for the task- but talking about perfection irrespective of any goal or function is unintelligible. So talking of, for instance, a perfect being (e.g. God), is just meaningless; if X is not perfect for... something or other, then it is not meaningful to attribute perfection to X at all. Its basically like saying that "Joe is to the right of." As in, to the right of, but not to the right of anything. It's just word salad.

(of course, there is another sense in which one could mean the word "perfect/perfection"- as an emotive term expressing ones approval for something... "my birthday party was perfect!" just means that one esteems it very highly. But if this is what is meant, then you are right- this is purely a subjective evaluation based on taste or preference, and appears to have no objective correlate in reality)

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

In this context? Absolutely. Perfection consists in maximal suitability to a given goal or function- it could not be more adequate for achieving a given goal or purpose. Thus we can talk of a perfect day (for going for a walk/swimming/fishing/whatever), a perfect song (to fit our mood, our tastes, etc), or a perfect tool for the task, talking about perfection irrespective of any goal or function is unintelligible- so talking of, for instance, a perfect being (e.g. God), is just meaningless. If X is not perfect for... something or other, then it is not meaningful to attribute perfection to X. Its basically like saying that "Joe is to the right of." As in, to the right of, but not to the right of anything. It's just word salad.

(of course, there is another sense in which one could mean the word "perfect/perfection"- as an emotive term expressing ones approval for something... "my birthday party was perfect!" just means that one esteems it very highly. But if this is what is meant, then you are right- this is purely a subjective evaluation based on taste or preference, and appears to have no objective correlate in reality)

Yes, that's what I was saying. Concepts of perfected beings are inherently subjective. The Christian notion of god is illogical anyway, imo.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

One thing that science can't figure is ethics, that belongs to reason and philosophy. Religion can't determine any objective ethics, however it can at least provide us with inspiration for our own set personal ethics.

 

[George-ananda]

What say you?

Belief in God and Science are both great things. I'll take belief in God a million times over Science if that odd comparison can be made.

If I can only have access to the teachings of my favorite spiritual teacher or access to the advantages of science, I would take the spiritual teacher.

 

[Objective Qualia]

Well we have all heard the statement in one form or fashion, right?

Science has given us medicine, and even the keypad I am typing on right now.
Where as, what we have been given by believing in God, it is often framed as, myth, fairy tales, wishful thinking, wars, dumbing down of our societies, on and on.

Familiar with everyone? I should hope so?

Some have asked of Christians, "What? Would you rather we drop science altogether and just live on what the bible tells us?"

So, I pondered that for a bit. I reasoned that if the promises of the bible are true, namely, that I will live an eternity in bliss, I'd take that everyday over a keyboard and some medicine that will keep me alive a few more days, months or years.

Science will never keep us alive forever, or end suffering, though in many cases has caused tremendous suffering.
It will of course continue to contribute useful things to the world, but when compared to the promises of the bible, the totality of all of sciences best work, still dwarf to eternal blissful life.

What say you?

Science has fed the hungry, cured diseases that killed and maimed millions, almost doubled our average life spans, and is now helping the lame walk and the blind see. Granted science has its consequences but I'll take modern science over what we had before.

Contrast this with the bible, which has done none of these things but does have a lot of promises for after I die. I find results more valuable than promises.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I actually argued somewhere else that today we have a harder life than the caveman because of all the so called better advances.

What in the world. :areyoucra I don't see how that could possibly be argued.