Religion, who cares?

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by martes86

Nice duet and quotes those you're making... :rotfl: :P :P :P

A duet with The Avon Lady? Are you crazy!
Don't you see it's a bloody cut-throat fight I'm in. It's either her or me, no quarters given.
I'm here trying to survive with a couple of ******* English dictionaries, a lists of US WW II submarines and a link to Rex Hunt Fishing Adventures, for C-d's(SS224) sake...

[martes86]

Originally Posted by Abraham

A duet with The Avon Lady? Are you crazy!
Don't you see it's a bloody cut-throat fight, I'm in. It's either her or me, no quarters given.
I'm here trying to survive with a couple of ******* English dictionaries, a lists of US WW II submarines and a link to Rex Hunt Fishing Adventures, for C-d's(SS224) sake...

Hahahaha

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Abraham

Are you trying to clam be up and mussel me out?

Clam you up and mussel you out? That wouldn't be kosher, would it?[/quote:26d037467b]
No, they're not. They mackerel problem for me.

Why, if I ate one of those, I'd go to the whaling wall and p-ray for frog-iveness.[/quote:26d037467b]But would C-d(SS224) forgive you? That is the question![/quote:26d037467b]
This is bassphemy! [/quote:26d037467b]Tang(SS306)... that was a Blower (SS325)![/quote:26d037467b]

Oww! My eyes!

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Abraham

The poll is so poorly worded that it hardly leaves anybody who is serious about his religion a choice.
You could as well have asked: "do you vote to be considered stupid by me or not?"
Usually the formulation of polls like this - we've had more - characterizes the knowledge and objectivity of the author more than anything else. Calling "Zionism" a religion just proves that point.

Were the question: "Religion, who cares?" I would have voted: "Yes!".
I am a convinced (Protestant) Christian and aware of the cultural luggage it provides me with. I stand in a Western European 'Judeo-Christian' tradition of which I am proud. I am also very aware that humans are by definition religious creatures anyway. I accept the limitations of the human mind to understand the whole creation. I also recognize the challenge for us humans to learn, educate and think...

Leave me out please. I WAS cristian by education, not by definition.

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by Fish

Leave me out please. I WAS cristian by education, not by definition.

I didn't say all humans are Christians, but religious. Our knowledge is based on presumptions, a trancedental leap of faith in God, a god, Nature, the Unknown, Science, ourselves, you name it. How can I leave you out...?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Abraham

A duet with The Avon Lady? Are you crazy!
Don't you see it's a bloody cut-throat fight I'm in. It's either her or me, no quarters given.
I'm here trying to survive with a couple of ******* English dictionaries, a lists of US WW II submarines and a link to Rex Hunt Fishing Adventures, for C-d's(SS224) sake...

This cartoonist must be reading my mind! Today's "Pearls Before Swine":

[Abraham]

*SS268*

Finally I can SS425(-fish) VICTORY!
I can now SS390(-i) my SS478 in its SS397(-fish) and lift my finger off the SS237.
Avon Lady, you might call me a SS365 but you are certainly a SS280 yourself. Next time just try SS257 to SS228 away at me, but I warn you, I'm as solid as a SS274, so you'll really have to SS385....
(There is no SS271 of SS240(-l) on my side though. I may have caused you a headache, if so, forgive me and take an SS309).

I can't keep posting that much today, I'm taking a SS275 and tonight I go to my shooting club "SS375". I'm serious!


The Abraham Codes:

SS228 USS Drum
SS237 USS Trigger
SS240 USS Angler
SS251 USS Flounder
SS257 USS Harder
SS268 USS Puffer
SS271 USS Ray
SS274 USS Rock
SS275 USS Runner
SS280 USS Steelhead
SS309 USS Aspro
SS365 USS Hardhead
SS375 USS Macabi
SS385 USS Bang
SS390 USS Plaice
SS397 USS Scabbardfish
SS413 USS Spot
SS425 USS Trumpetfish
SS478 USS Cutlass

[The Avon Lady]

I've stopped playing.

Your last posts are sub-standard.

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

I've stopped playing.
Your last posts are sub-standard.

If you're not playing anymore and don't appreciate sub-standards, you'd better leave this site and go to: http://www.sim.com/
:P

[The Avon Lady]

Hey! I'll surf where I want to!

Stop giving me a haddock!

[Fish]

In my dictionary, religion is faith, "religion" and worship (eredienst).
So, when faith (trust) means religious... then I am religious.

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by Fish

In my dictionary, religion is faith, "religion" and worship (eredienst).
So, when faith (trust) means religious... then I am religious.

I meant "Faith" as opposite to "Knowledge".
We may think that God exists or does not exists, we may even claim subjective knowledge of His existence, like I do, but no objective knowledge scientific proof exists.

[Hitman]

but no objective knowledge scientific proof exists.

That depends on what you call "proof"

The existance of God can be proven to at least the same degree that ancient civilizations now dissapeared, for example, or that black holes in the Universe

How?

Like this:

We all have an input to our intelligence thanks to our senses, we see, smell, taste, touch and hear, but yet ther are concepts that exist and however are not perceived by the senses, but instead by your reasoning ability. For example the numbers as abstract concepts do not exist in the world, there is no physical pure number one, two, three, etc. Same as that you can't find physically abstractions or concepts that go beyond matter, like for example rules or laws. But you know that they exist thanks to your ability to reason.

In that sense, reasoning is a sense able to perceive items, same as other physical senses.

Now, how does that relate to God? Well first of all you gotta define what God is, and re that I consider God firts of all an intelligent being, origin of the universe and its rules, which exists in a different dimension of us, and has no physic representation in our world. How can we then proof his existance? Easy: By looking at his work, at the manifestations of his will and actions.

We are now going back to the example I put before: How do we know that sumerians ever existed? None of us has ever seen a living sumerian, nor their civilization, and even ancient scripts like the Bible and older do not mention them. But yet we take as granted that they existed, and that is tahnks to having found an evidence of their activity: Ruins, scripts in a special language and much more.

At this point it is essential to explain the difference betweebn chaos and order/rules/laws: Chaos is essentially randomness and unpredictability, by definition ilogic. On the contrary, rules, laws and logic are necessarily the product of a rational will. Where there is rational intelligence, there is no chaos, and the opposite.

So when you go walking in the mountain and suddely find a couple of stones set together forming a house, you don't think: "Oh, what a lucky coincidence, chaos in the falling stones has made them come together in the form of a house", but instead you think: "Look, someone has been grouping stones here to do a house" That is, in the particular and rational organization of the matter you recognize the result of an intelligent action with a purpose, i.e. of a WILL

What has that to do with sumerians? Simple. When the archeologist first found ruins and scripts, they did not think: "Look, the wind has eroded this stones and caused this", but instead thought: "Here is the evidence of an intelligent action, caused by a rational mind we can't see, but we know was here"

Take a look now at the universe that surrounds us. Have you ever seen or can you imagine a more perfect organization of matter, governed by constant and precise rules?

What does that tell you? Undoubtedly, it tells you that an intelligent will is behind that. How else could have chaos created such a perfect organization? And even if out of pure luck the matter had organized itself following rules...what could cause those rules to keep being observed trillions, trillions of trillions each tenth of second?

Obviously, rules are not the force that makes the same rule to be pbserved. Rules are abstractions of behaviours of the matter, pure observation results. Where is the strenght or force that causes the rules to be observed precisely again and again? Why, if chaos is the origin, do the rules exist and keep being observed by matter?

It is time to say that any repeated observation of a law is, undoubtedly, the result of an intelligent will. Take the human laws as example: They are abstractions of a desired behaviour, a certain will to have people react like indicated. What causes that people obbey them? The will to do so, no other answer is possible.

What causes the forces of nature to exist and observe rules? A will that they keep so. Any behaviour that follows a pattern is the result of a will from an intelligent creature, with the proper power to force the matter to keep observing the rule. In that sense, the very same protons and electrons that integrate the atoms of our body keep together, in my opinion, because an intelligent will wants it like that. Otherwise, they would spread around in chaos.

Does this sound to you as enough evidence?

[Abraham]

That's your opinion, which I - partly - share by the way. But I don't think you can call it scientific evidence, I would call it a likely thesis (or perhaps subjective knowledge).
Still, if - as you believe to have proven - one God exists, that would have serious ramifications for all of us.
If He has a plan with the Universe, He might just as likely have a plan with individuals like you and me.
He might as well have revealed Himself to us.
And for Someone allmighty who can construe and guide the Universe, performing "religious fairytales" - as Damo1977 called it - would be no more than a minor distraction.
You agree or do my questions go too far in the direction of a monotheistic religion for your taste, Hitman?

[Fish]

No, not at all. :|\

A "intelligent will", exist only in your mind. We, have no clue whats out there, as the litle thinks in a drop of water have, when I look to them through a microscope.