Why do people think that God is a man?

2 + 2,

I know it's hard to accept but, Star Treck was just a tv show.

Peace, Love, and Preyers
ISDAMan

------------------
Feel free to contact me privately at isda@gte.net . I'm a Christian Web Developer. I run Apostle Creed Online.

[This message has been edited by ISDAMan (edited August 31, 1999).]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Boris: I'm actually killing time at work, so I need to be kind of brief; more later, when I have better time to consider the whole of your answer. But I did want to throw an issue up for you--"artificial" evolution.

In the end, will it matter how humanity "evolves"? If we look beyond biology, there are electrical processes taking place, an exchange and balance of energy in its various atomic forms. From that standpoint, artificial evolution is merely evolution.

That's what I meant when I wrote, somewhere in those posts, that "evolution" is a word so large as to include itself. When all is said and done, and humanity lists its attributes, the advances will be regarded as evolution (although for dumber reasons ... Americans, at least, would hate to consider that their polymer parts are any different from their flesh parts, from any perspective.)

Furthermore, we've learned from industrial research--pharmaceutical, especially--that not all progress is good. Long-term effects of various drugs eventually crushed the positive aspects of their immediate application. What if evolution, determined inasmuch as humanity can determine it, has the same effect?

If a new microbe shows up and wipes out humanity, that's progress. If we artificially manipulate ourselves for immediate concerns--strength, agility, beauty, posterity, homogony--it is entirely possible that the evolutionary course we assume will lead to human extinction.

Thus I am to turn the question back to you: What concerns do we have if we act on our obligation to utilize newfound evolutionary technology? The first pop-culture "evolutions" will be artificial limbs, organs, or otherwise for vanity sake. (Note the "pop-culture", as I assert nothing about prosthetics or other useful applications of such technology.) What if those changes are all it takes to give that next predator a foothold on human extinction?

More later, I promise. And it will have received greater attention then.

thx,
Tiassa

------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm back. The person nobody wishes to
hear from has finally returned.
Well... not quite. I got school to
think about, and I've gotten kinda
bored, so I won't be on here really
that much.

----------------------------------------
So, this discussion's turned into
something no more than a silly debate
over evolution? I could have expected
this; once again religion and science
are fighting...

Evolution is fact, it exists. It has
always existed since the dawn of life,
exists in the world today, and will
continue to exist past your own lifetimes
for billions of years.
Its nothing truly much to think about.
All evolution is, is a process that
allows species to develope. Evolution
is basically the result of decisions,
and actions generated by thought.
All evolution really means is to be
born, to live, to grow, to learn,
to adapt, to reproduce, and progress.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

tiassa,

what i mean by the 8/31 post - in relation to evolution - is that consciuosness precipitates possibility. we know the brain has evolved, only now we are also more aware than any other (known) period. we have considerations of our potential. our own abstract expectations have a way to manifest.
perhaps even to the extent of our own 'rules' . what is the next period of brain evolution to be... what has our accumulated knowledge got to do with any of it?... and what of ree will ?... could we consider evolution to be natures own innate intelligence implimented in the quest to survive? are we a race without challenge (regardless of what some might think)? we have become quite a horde on this planet and many have a great deal on their minds - what might be the significance of this upon our brain as it develops with every bit of new information? we are a colony with the capacity of utilizing our intelligence, perhaps new social/behavioral studies can show something. what do most believe and what do most perceive about their universe and, in relation, how do most relate to who/what they are. by recognizing the past, we gain the future.

 

Xeno,

although you are a selfish little brad I kind of grew some simpathy for you. You 're blind faith in science is almost cute and I should support it cause I also believe firmly in the scientific method.
There is a difference here, science works through people and they can make mistakes, it is only through the on going interaction of these people in their various fields that piece by piece the mysteries of our universe are discovered. This means that no matter how much you have accomplished as a scientist, you never can be really sure you have discovered the ultimate truth. You can only hope that your theory is the best one fitting the facts.
Also something that you will have to learn to accept is that some questions just lie beyond the scientific method, these are the existential and metaphysical questions. They are there so people have found many different answers. Since these answers are not verifiable they each have the same truth value, meaning you can't just go about telling people that they are wrong and only you have the right answers. Still I find it good for you that you have taken up the search, that is the only right thing to do!

P.S. good luck at school...

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

[This message has been edited by Plato (edited September 01, 1999).]

 

Plato,

errr, umm... I guess you're right.
I do go about telling people what they
should believe in and when they go to
say something *BOOM* - there I go
again blabbing on and on...
I guess that's what people find so
annoying about me isn't it. I'll just
be more of an observer from now on.

By the way, just because I say something
doesn't mean that its wrong or untrue.
Its all a matter of using the right
descriptions and sentencing I guess.

About religion: I continue to revise
what I believe in. I have different
views now than I did a month ago.
Its nice to believe in something and
that's what makes all of us unique.

I've noticed lately that science has
been trying to explain spirituality
and religion using the "theory of everything."
I'd like to comment that not everything
can be explained by science and there
are some things that should not try
to be explained by science. I understand
the fact that the very purpose of science
is understanding, but some things go
beyond that level.
The physical and spiritual are two
different things. Much how the moon
differs from the earth. Notice how
many people decades before the lunar
landing used earthly concepts to depict
the appearence of the moon. I find
that science has been doing much the
same for spirituality. Using such terms
as "superstrings" and "parallels,"
science has been trying to paint a
picture in people's heads that the
universe and its 10 densities are
wireframed in a 4th or 5th dimensional
perspective.

 

Xeno,
<justify>I had to laugh loudly at your opening remark....that was quite funny!
Could you do me a favour and stop hitting the return button while typing until you are ready to start a new paragraph??? Fear not, the post will look quite normal when you submit it.</justify>
Chat soon,
Dave.