Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Intelligent Design: Evolution 2.0


Only_

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, psyche101 said:

That's why the only fair position is that of a tooth fairy or teapot agnostic. 

God might exist, sure  its just that according to what we have learned, its extraordinarily unlikely, same with notions if the afterlife.

Remeber,  science does not deal in absolutes. If evidence for God or the afterlife were to show up, that would be taken very seriously. 

From the evidence we have which is supported by repeatability upon demand, and prediction, we can say the existance of 'God' is as likely as the tooth fairy also existing, or a teapot in orbit of the sun with Mars. 

Nobody can prove they don't exist  but we have no good reason to consider their existence as valid. But if either are proven, we are happy to rewrite as much as has to get to accommodate this new information. 

Right, but you're comparing physical things with non-physical things.  If God exists, then he's not like a rock, tree, or planet.....since he predates them all and thus must exist outside of space and time.  Since there is no physical way to test this, in not a good analogy.  A teapot orbiting the sun is not some impossible notion.  A teapot is a chunk of matter just as an asteroid or other space debris and is subject to the laws of physics.  No one knows what God is, or how spiritual things may work, so by definition any understanding of it would be non-scientific.

So, the question is.....do things exist that are not known scientifically.  The answer is yes.  You know this because new discoveries are being made all the time, so prior to their discovery they were thought to exist but not known to exist.  

In any event, evidence for the afterlife does exist, and it is apparent that some people don't wish to acknowledge this fact.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I'm not following you.

 

 

Will

Not all descriptions of God are constant, there are many different qualities and personalities that define all of these different gods that create distraction and confusion. If all these gods are the same why and for what purpose would god need to make itself appear as seperate and distinct entities if gods intention is to unify man?

jmccr8

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

If all these gods are the same why and for what purpose would god need to make itself appear as seperate and distinct entities if gods intention is to unify man?

 

Good question. I don't know.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Will

Not all descriptions of God are constant, there are many different qualities and personalities that define all of these different gods that create distraction and confusion. If all these gods are the same why and for what purpose would god need to make itself appear as seperate and distinct entities if gods intention is to unify man?

jmccr8

This is a most common confusion. The question of "What or who is God?" We know of Polytheism and Monotheism, we know of so many divinites from known history, so when god is termed in this way - yes this is confusing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, joc said:

There isn't any scientific evidence for it.   Scientific evidence would be this:

Okay people we have here a man who has been dead for 3 days....we have done every test known to mankind...he is dead...very, very dead...now...let's cut his head open for autopsy and see if he comes back to life.

Why do you even bother with such crap if you don't even believe it yourself.  Don't waste my time anymore...it is not very often that someone gets called a jerk by me...(actually, I don't think I have ever called anyone a derogatory name)  but you are seriously very, very close.

So people who view things differently than you are jerks?  Whatever dude.  Bail on the thread.  You asked for cold dead three days on a slab and I gave it to you.  You didn't like it.  

In fact, the guy who was dead for three days came to during the autopsy as he was getting cut into.  It's obvious you didnt read the links and you don't care to know what they say.  The very thing you disbelieve is documented to have occurred on at least one occasion - that makes is not impossible.  

But since you yourself seem unwilling to discuss or debate politely, you're right.....we have nothing to discuss.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

This is a most common confusion. The question of "What or who is God?" We know of Polytheism and Monotheism, we know of so many divinites from known history, so when god is termed in this way - yes this is confusing.

Hi Illyrius

Yes and this is why I question how people can say that there is one god and that everyone is speaking about the same being when there are obvious differences that conflict.

jmccr8

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Guyver said:

So people who view things differently than you are jerks?  Whatever dude.  Bail on the thread.  You asked for cold dead three days on a slab and I gave it to you.  You didn't like it.  

In fact, the guy who was dead for three days came to during the autopsy as he was getting cut into.  It's obvious you didnt read the links and you don't care to know what they say.  The very thing you disbelieve is documented to have occurred on at least one occasion - that makes is not impossible.  

But since you yourself seem unwilling to discuss or debate politely, you're right.....we have nothing to discuss.  

Maybe I won't leave the thread...that was late last night after driving for hours and hours....perspectives change with a little sleep...

...so...I'll just say...I think you are unwilling to understand that if someone wakes up on the autopsy table, it only means one thing...someone misdiagnosed them as dead.

So I will ask you point blank...do you personally believe the guy had been dead for three days and came back to life suddenly after having had no blood circulate in his body and no air in his lungs ...for 72 hours?  Or...are you the least bit speculative that...possibly he might not have actually been dead?

 

Edited by joc
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Will Due said:

There is only ONE God.

 

1 hour ago, Crazy Horse said:

God is a mystery - yes.

And yes, I realise I am saying the same thing as those who believe in the Big Bang, that was the point!

"Some sort of energy in the void", right - give it a name, I choose "God", you may choose something else, only God is Inteligent Living Mind, so this belief opens up so many options. Instead of the materialistic view that life and consciousness are basically accidents.

And there is evidence, your life force for one must have come from this place, you may wish to deny it, I don't.

The name of that "energy in the void" is dark energy.  Here is an article about hoow it creates the illusion of acceleration:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2009/09/025/pdf

So you call dark energy "God?"  Worshipping dark energy is on a par with worshipping the tree in your back yard.  But, I suppose one could make sense of that:  "God manifest as that tree."  "God manifest as the whole universe."  "God manifest as dark energy."

God is an "Intelligent Living Mind?"  I have an intelligent lving mind, so I guess I qualify; although, I have never considered myself to be a god.  But if you're nominating me...

As far as I know, the "life force" is chemical energy.  That's what drives our metabolism.  It is what keeps us alive.  It is, primarily, a single chemical compound:  ATP for adenosin triphosphate.  All the energy that powres our bodies is contained in that molecule at one point in our metabolsim.  So now god is nothing more than ATP?

I wish you'd come up with a consistent answer.  At least if it was wrong, we'd have something to discuss, but this constant dodging and evading is getting us nowhere.  Too many answers are about the same as no answer.

Doug

 

Edited by Doug1029
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

Yes and this is why I question how people can say that there is one god and that everyone is speaking about the same being when there are obvious differences that conflict.

jmccr8

 

My opinion about the whole matter is the following:

The consciousness of people through history changes, so in my opinion people perceived gods as real as we perceive science now. What they perceived they described in myths just like science perceives what it sees now in formulas and theories. So eventually in history there arose monotheism out of politheism, and at the same time people's consciousness started to shift to philosophy and rationalism, what monotheism is about in my opinion is the ultimate being, which is perceived in monotheistic religions in somewhat similar way in some slight distincitons.. Now this principle is described in a way which is uncompatible to our present way of thinking about reality... and everything became a matter of jokes about a bearded man in the clouds.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

Yes and this is why I question how people can say that there is one god and that everyone is speaking about the same being when there are obvious differences that conflict.

jmccr8

 

 

The reason is that God has many times revealed himself, or through his representatives.

The prophets all said that there is only one God, repeatedly. 

Two thousand years ago the Creator Son himself, the actual being and person who created our local universe said that there's only one God, his Father and our Father.

He also declared because God is One, and there's only one God that:

"He who has seen me has seen the Father."

 

IMHO the confusion being discussed here comes about because some refuse to believe this. Refuse to believe the truth.

That's alright though. But not for me.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Illyrius said:

My opinion about the whole matter is the following:

The consciousness of people through history changes, so in my opinion people perceived gods as real as we perceive science now. What they perceived they described in myths just like science perceives what it sees now in formulas and theories. So eventually in history there arose monotheism out of politheism, and at the same time people's consciousness started to shift to philosophy and rationalism, what monotheism is about in my opinion is the ultimate being, which is perceived in monotheistic religions in somewhat similar way in some slight distincitons.. Now this principle is described in a way which is uncompatible to our present way of thinking about reality... and everything became a matter of jokes about a bearded man in the clouds.

Hi Illyrius

Thanks, the thing is is there are still at present different groups worshipping different god concepts. For me god is different again to what is commonly accepted because god is the creation of man and has been given qualities that cannot be confirmed. Many belief systems are rigid where science is not because it is always exploring, discovering and correcting itself.

From how I perceive god this is not a problem because god as I see god has no personal identity, we have the ability to express god by exploring our intellect and living with compassion for each other.

jmccr8

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

Thanks, the thing is is there are still at present different groups worshipping different god concepts. For me god is different again to what is commonly accepted because god is the creation of man and has been given qualities that cannot be confirmed. Many belief systems are rigid where science is not because it is always exploring, discovering and correcting itself.

From how I perceive god this is not a problem because god as I see god has no personal identity, we have the ability to express god by exploring our intellect and living with compassion for each other.

jmccr8

I agree with most of this post.

But i have to make a little remark. God is a creation of man in a sense that he rationally or visionary tries to describe the ultimate being, in a real sense god is incomprehensible ultimate reality... so all the man tries is to describe it philosophically or visionary.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

The reason is that God has many times revealed himself, or through his representatives.

The prophets all said that there is only one God, repeatedly. 

Two thousand years ago the Creator Son himself, the actual being and person who created our local universe said that there's only one God, his Father and our Father.

He also declared because God is One, and there's only one God that:

"He who has seen me has seen the Father."

 

IMHO the confusion being discussed here comes about because some refuse to believe this. Refuse to believe the truth.

That's alright though. But not for me.

 

 

Will,

That only works from one position and one construct of god. How could you expect that would be relevant to people that do not share your ideals without creating conflict especially if they are as rigid in their position?

jmccr8

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Will,

That only works from one position and one construct of god. How could you expect that would be relevant to people that do not share your ideals without creating conflict especially if they are as rigid in their position?

jmccr8

 

Perhaps things might get better when it is realized that it's a construct; that the reality of God is regarded as a construct.

Do you get what I mean?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

I agree with most of this post.

But i have to make a little remark. God is a creation of man in a sense that he rationally or visionary tries to describe the ultimate being, in a real sense god is incomprehensible ultimate reality... so all the man tries is to describe it philosophically or visionary.

Hi Illyrius

The question for me is, is god a being or simply a part of everything without having motive?

jmccr8

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

The question for me is, is god a being or simply a part of everything without having motive?

jmccr8

I would certainly say a being. But really incomprehensible, in a sense God permeats everything, and everything is a part of god. The question of motive is very puzzling to me too.... this is funny but really this is a question i have no clue what to say about :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Will Due said:

 

Perhaps things might get better when it is realized that it's a construct; that the reality of God is regarded as a construct.

Do you get what I mean?

 

 

Hi Will

Of course god is a construct and how would you encourage others to abandon those constructs to adopt another construct? Would you abandon yours if it was to bring all mankind together?

jmccr8

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Illyrius said:

I would certainly say a being. But really incomprehensible, in a sense God permeats everything, and everything is a part of god. The question of motive is very puzzling to me too.... this is funny but really this is a question i have no clue what to say about :)

Hi Illyrius

What if the only sense of being for god was us? That we are god because we are all a part of everything, we are what motivates and gives meaning.

jmccr8

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Will

Of course god is a construct and how would you encourage others to abandon those constructs to adopt another construct? Would you abandon yours if it was to bring all mankind together?

jmccr8

 

You completely missed the point.

God is not a construct. God is real, eventhough the understanding of God's reality will always be incomplete.

However, something is a construct. The construct is that God is a construct.

Now do you get what I mean?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

What if the only sense of being for god was us? That we are god because we are all a part of everything, we are what motivates and gives meaning.

jmccr8

Hi Jay!

I dont know. First of all the consciousness of man works in duality mode. God's consciousness is incomprehensible because god is Unity, so it is impossible for me to say anything about IT.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Will Due said:

 

You completely missed the point.

God is not a construct. God is real, eventhough the understanding of God's reality will always be incomplete.

However, something is a construct. The construct is that God is a construct.

Now do you get what I mean?

 

 

Hi Will

Are you sure I missed the point? How do you seperate a construct of who god is from what god is? If you have a belief you can only reject what does not conform to your perception.

jmccr8

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

If you have a belief you can only reject what does not conform to your perception.

 

I don't reject anything. Can you honestly say the same thing?

This is getting old.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

How do you seperate a construct of who god is from what god is?

 

Simple.

Don't make a construct out of who God is, in the first place.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I don't reject anything. Can you honestly say the same thing?

This is getting old.

 

 

Hi Will

You might reread several threads and you will see what you have rejected. The way you argue opposing positions is rejecting aspects of people.

jmccr8

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Simple.

Don't make a construct out of who God is, in the first place.

 

 

Will

If you do not have a construct then what are you left with to base your faith?

jmccr8

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked
  • This topic was locked and unlocked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.