The Mystery Thread

[ecco]

I'm not afraid of anything. The question is why do you think that I have to explain my position? I'm not likely to be baited into a discussion on the ridiculous. Am I asking you to explain your position?

I'm not interested in a debate. How many times have I told you that? If I'm unable to debate why are you trying to provoke me?

Very well, then, I'll not say another word on the subject.

Okey Dokey

 

[Earthling]

ecco:
Let's try to cut through some of the BS. You stated:
and none of the unbelievers that I know of believe in evolution.​

So you are saying that you know people who do not believe in any god and also do not believe in evolution. What were their responses when you asked them for their opinion on the origin of humans?

If it ain't GodDidIt and it ain't Evolution, then What?



Oh, well. What did I expect?

Good question.

 

[ecco]

The Rapture is a 200 year old teaching introduced by John Darby and not really very widely accepted outside of the U.S. While we are at it would you like to discuss the unscriptural adoptions of the Trinity from Plato, the immortal soul from Socrates, hell from Dante and Milton, Christmas from Dickens, the cross from Constantine and Easter from Astarte?

I pick and choose my Bible beliefs based upon the Bible, not Greek philosophy coming from more ancient Babylonian teachings.

If these are not referring to The Rapture, then what?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 ASV Matthew 24:37-40 NIV
15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord (παρουσίαν Parousia),[31] will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

Matthew 24:37-40 NIV
37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming (παρουσία Parousia)[32] of the Son of Man. 38For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming (παρουσία Parousia)[33] of the Son of Man. 40Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left.​

 

[Milton Platt]

It's of no use to me.

So you reject fundamental aspects of biology, chemistry, physics, anthropology, geology, paleontology, zoology, genetics, cosmology? How did you become so well versed in the understanding of such a wide range of academic undertaking? Your IQ must be quite impressive.

 

[Jose Fly]

Whats the difference between religion and philosophy?

Definition of PHILOSOPHY

Definition of RELIGION

 

[Jollybear]

Definition of PHILOSOPHY

Definition of RELIGION

Alright, those definitions are generally what i had in mind as well.

Now, next question, why dont you see that i have been using philosophical thought in my presentation of ID?

 

[Bird123]

ecco:
You are not the first theobabbler I've come across in my time. Comments from folks like you are often along the lines of ...

• You are not ready to see The Truth.
• You must open your mind to see The Truth.
• You have not learned to see the entity that is The Universe.

See. I was right. The second item in my list. You guys are so predictable.




I evaluated religion. I found it was as childishly silly as my comic books.

The Biblical version of evolution...

When they came up with the idea that the earth was round and not flat, hear all the laughs of those believers who Believed the earth was flat. Looks flat to me. Perhaps, the story would have been different if believers took more effort to Discover the Real Truth.

Are you taking any effort to Discover or like so many, you rely on your beliefs as much as the religious people?

Sure, many religious beliefs are not true. On the other hand, there is something they can teach you that you have no clue about.

When one limits the possibilities from one's view, one creates a box that isolates one from truth in favor of a fantasy world to their liking. Reality always has a way of pulling one out. It's just a matter of time. As we all should Discover, there is no time limit on learning.

 

[ecco]

Are you taking any effort to Discover or like so many, you rely on your beliefs as much as the religious people?

I haven't heard anything in the past ten years that I hadn't heard before, many times. Do you think it makes sense to investigate the same claims over and over in the hopes of Discovering something that was not Discovered in previous efforts? You do know what one of the signs of insanity is, don't you?

Sure, many religious beliefs are not true. On the other hand, there is something they can teach you that you have no clue about.

I have always preferred to learn from and learn about things that are true. That makes a lot more sense to me.

But, OK. Regale me with something I don't have a clue about.

When one limits the possibilities from one's view, one creates a box that isolates one from truth in favor of a fantasy world to their liking. Reality always has a way of pulling one out. It's just a matter of time. As we all should Discover, there is no time limit on learning.

Reality hit me at an early age. Around ten I realized that God was as real as any of the characters in my comic books. But I kept an open mind. I listened to many, I read from some. The more I Discovered, the more I understood the fantasy of religion and how and why people fall under it's influence.

 

[Jose Fly]

Alright, those definitions are generally what i had in mind as well.

Now, next question, why dont you see that i have been using philosophical thought in my presentation of ID?

You're not paying attention. I said you're not doing science, as you'd claimed.

 

[Jollybear]

You're not paying attention. I said you're not doing science, as you'd claimed.

You also said i was presenting religion. Let me ask you again, did i present a "philosophical" case for ID?

 

[Jose Fly]

You also said i was presenting religion. Let me ask you again, did i present a "philosophical" case for ID?

Yes, you presented a religious/philosophical case for ID creationism.

 

[Workman]

Take it easy. Take it slow. No fuss.

First question. Is it okay for me to reject evolution while accepting other tenets of science?

I guess it Depends on you!

With the many, we depend on and live in for science. How do the many know what to reject in what is not!

Question is how do you define evolution?

 

[Jollybear]

Yes, you presented a religious/philosophical case for ID creationism.

Ok, you put the religious before the philosophical part. Are you saying i used more religion then philosophy?

 

[Bird123]

I haven't heard anything in the past ten years that I hadn't heard before, many times. Do you think it makes sense to investigate the same claims over and over in the hopes of Discovering something that was not Discovered in previous efforts? You do know what one of the signs of insanity is, don't you?



I have always preferred to learn from and learn about things that are true. That makes a lot more sense to me.

But, OK. Regale me with something I don't have a clue about.



Reality hit me at an early age. Around ten I realized that God was as real as any of the characters in my comic books. But I kept an open mind. I listened to many, I read from some. The more I Discovered, the more I understood the fantasy of religion and how and why people fall under it's influence.

your quote:I haven't heard anything in the past ten years that I hadn't heard before, many times. Do you think it makes sense to investigate the same claims over and over in the hopes of Discovering something that was not Discovered in previous efforts? My answer: Did all the great discoveries really come from investigating the claims of others? That is not how it's done.

Haven't I pointed you in a direction by which you can discover something? Like so many, beliefs are all you care about. Since you believe God does not exist, you close off all possibilities in favor of holding onto that believe you love so much. If you think that truth always shows up agreeable, you do not know truth.

your quote:But, OK. Regale me with something I don't have a clue about. My answer: AS I see it, you are blind to everything except this physical world. Your view is a very shallow surface view leaving so much behind. You do not even have a clue that you are a Spiritual Being in your true nature. Why do you think all the spiritual things stay with you longer that anything physical?

your quote:Reality hit me at an early age. Around ten I realized that God was as real as any of the characters in my comic books. But I kept an open mind. I listened to many, I read from some. The more I Discovered, the more I understood the fantasy of religion and how and why people fall under it's influence.[/QUOTE] My answerid you realize God does not exist because religion does not add up? I see you listened to many and read from some. Do you always get your information from others? When that information does not add up, do you give up the search for truth since you deem others must have the answers?

I too had my moment when I found religion did not add up. Unlike you. I would not stop looking until I discovered what the truth really is. I wasn't going to settle on the beliefs some saying God exists others saying God does not.

As I see it, Discovering whether God exists or not is not what this world is all about. It was something I had to do. So carry on. Be who you must. It's a part of the plan.

I have found no religion that really understands God. On the other hand, there are many people who know a lot about God. I think there exists pieces of the puzzle in every religion. Perhaps, they would discover more if they all got together. Yes, let the atheists get involved too. They have a part religious people are missing just like religious people have something you are missing.

AS I see it, God's IQ is so far above mankind that we are ants. If one is going to understand the actions of such a Being, one is going to have to Stretch toward Higher more Advanced Thinking. The puzzle goes way beyond surface thinking. Yadda,Yadda, Yadda and avoiding the work it takes to discover and understand will not get you there.

I have Discovered that this world does all add up including the People factor. The Dynamics of it all are Amazing. It is a Masterpiece,warts and all.

AS I see it, you might be surprised that you already know God whether you realize you do or not.

AS I said. Carry on. It will be OK!

 

[Jose Fly]

Ok, you put the religious before the philosophical part. Are you saying i used more religion then philosophy?

Given how you stated the "designer" is God and how you limited what that God would or wouldn't do based on your religious beliefs, yes.

 

[Jollybear]

Given how you stated the "designer" is God and how you limited what that God would or wouldn't do based on your religious beliefs, yes.

Incorrect. What ive said and still say, is WHO the designer is has no barring on the design itself we see. You can be a muslim, jew, or Christian or hindu, or Buddhist or deist or polytheist or someone that believes aliens made us, it makes no difference, either one of those kind of Gods COULD have designed it.

Also, yes, i adhere to a certain kind of God, but, anyone who believes in a god can adhere to ID.

The other thing ive said and still say is i have used philosophy MORE then religion. So, i disagree with you there too.

When i told you there is certain things God cannot do based on logic, that was using philosophical thought, that was NOT religion.

The example > can God create a rock so big he cannot lift it? I answered NO, he cannot. You see, logic (philosophy) has assumptions surounding it.

So, the assumption here is God is infinite, that is, transcends space. This means logically, God cannot create a rock so big he cannot lift it. Thats logical based on the assumption that hes infinite.

You see this?

 

[Jose Fly]

Incorrect. What ive said and still say, is WHO the designer is has no barring on the design itself we see. You can be a muslim, jew, or Christian or hindu, or Buddhist or deist or polytheist or someone that believes aliens made us, it makes no difference, either one of those kind of Gods COULD have designed it.

Also, yes, i adhere to a certain kind of God, but, anyone who believes in a god can adhere to ID.

The other thing ive said and still say is i have used philosophy MORE then religion. So, i disagree with you there too.

You're missing the point. You asked about the arguments you made in this thread. That's what I addressed.

The fact is, your argument is basically "God made everything" and you put religiously-based conditions on how God did so. That's a religious argument.

When i told you there is certain things God cannot do based on logic, that was using philosophical thought, that was NOT religion.

The example > can God create a rock so big he cannot lift it? I answered NO, he cannot. You see, logic (philosophy) has assumptions surounding it.

So, the assumption here is God is infinite, that is, transcends space. This means logically, God cannot create a rock so big he cannot lift it. Thats logical based on the assumption that hes infinite.

You see this?

When I raised the possibility of God creating things one way, but making it appear as if they were created a different way you rejected that because you said it would make God deceitful. That's a religious belief.

 

[ecco]

your quote:I haven't heard anything in the past ten years that I hadn't heard before, many times. Do you think it makes sense to investigate the same claims over and over in the hopes of Discovering something that was not Discovered in previous efforts?
...

Haven't I pointed you in a direction by which you can discover something?

Not by a long shot. Nothing you posted is any different in substance from what others have said. The Bahais and the Mormons and the Pentecostalists will all say the same thing to you. How is it that you have not discovered their truth?

Like so many, beliefs are all you care about. Since you believe God does not exist, you close off all possibilities in favor of holding onto that believe you love so much. If you think that truth always shows up agreeable, you do not know truth.

Stating that I love my beliefs is childishly silly. That's just one more example of why I don't take people like you seriously.

your quote:But, OK. Regale me with something I don't have a clue about. My answer: AS I see it, you are blind to everything except this physical world. Your view is a very shallow surface view leaving so much behind.

So, you can't regale me with something I don't have a clue about. I didn't think you could.

You do not even have a clue that you are a Spiritual Being in your true nature. Why do you think all the spiritual things stay with you longer that anything physical?

Let's see, I still have my gyroscope from when I was a kid. I still have no supernatural spiritual beliefs.

I guess you are wrong again.

your quote:Reality hit me at an early age. Around ten I realized that God was as real as any of the characters in my comic books. But I kept an open mind. I listened to many, I read from some. The more I Discovered, the more I understood the fantasy of religion and how and why people fall under it's influence.

My answerid you realize God does not exist because religion does not add up? I see you listened to many and read from some. Do you always get your information from others? When that information does not add up, do you give up the search for truth since you deem others must have the answers?

There you go again with your childishly silly comments.

See below.

I too had my moment when I found religion did not add up. Unlike you. I would not stop looking until I discovered what the truth really is.

So how did you go about your road to discovery? Remember, you said I was wrong getting my information from what other people said and wrote.

Did you just wander around smelling the roses and coming to the conclusion that the roses and the earth and the universe were all just created by your version of a god?

While wandering around I guess you never listened to dissenting voices. How is that being open-minded?

As I see it, Discovering whether God exists or not is not what this world is all about. It was something I had to do.

By your own words, you didn't do a very thorough job of investigating. Maybe you spent a lot of time in a sweat lodge chewing peyote. That's a sure way to get religious visions.

They have a part religious people are missing just like religious people have something you are missing.

What I am missing is a belief in an imaginary man in the sky. Boo Hoo.

AS I see it, God's IQ is so far above mankind that we are ants. If one is going to understand the actions of such a Being, one is going to have to Stretch toward Higher more Advanced Thinking. The puzzle goes way beyond surface thinking.

Man has been creating gods for thousands of years. The only puzzle is how you cannot see that.

AS I see it, you might be surprised that you already know God whether you realize you do or not.

Do you really think you are the first person who has said that? Pap is pap.

 

[leibowde84]

You've seen this? Show me.

From Evidence for evolution
Fossils document the existence of now-extinct species, showing that different organisms have lived on Earth during different periods of the planet's history. They can also help scientists reconstruct the evolutionary histories of present-day species. For instance, some of the best-studied fossils are of the horse lineage. Using these fossils, scientists have been able to reconstruct a large, branching "family tree" for horses and their now-extinct relatives^66. Changes in the lineage leading to modern-day horses, such as the reduction of toed feet to hooves, may reflect adaptation to changes in the environment.

 

[Jollybear]

You're missing the point. You asked about the arguments you made in this thread. That's what I addressed.

The fact is, your argument is basically "God made everything" and you put religiously-based conditions on how God did so. That's a religious argument.

No, i used philosophical conditions and used logical arguments. I did not use religious conditions. No, i certainly did not.

Again. You provided the 2 definitions of religion and philosophy and yet you cant see the difference in demonstration?

When I raised the possibility of God creating things one way, but making it appear as if they were created a different way you rejected that because you said it would make God deceitful. That's a religious belief.

You could say its a religious belief, but, its also philosophical as well. Why? Because if creation dont look like one day old, then logically it probably isnt. Thats a philosophical position.