advanced string theory

[wayoftheleaf]

A few people i know have taken advanced string theory as their belief.


What is everyone's views on it as a belief?

[MrMojoRisin7127]

Wtf is advanced string theory?

[wayoftheleaf]

String theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory)

Theory of everything - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything)

Superstring theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superstring_theory)


^^read those.

[MrMojoRisin7127]

I read the stuff and found it extremely complicated.... lol
Maybe I'll look into it later after I've gone to college.

[BoilerUp]

I also accept the string theory, more or less because it presents actual fact rather than what some lunatic writes in a book.

If you want to take a look at string theory, the science channel offers a really good and simple look at it. Other then that, I suggest the movie "What The Bleep". It doesn't go too much into string theory itself, but covers most of quantum physics.

[wayoftheleaf]

what the bleep do we know anyway is excellent

and so is the discovery channels movie.


i've watched both.
not sure of the discovery channels name for its movie though.

[BokingTowls]

i saw the science channel program on paralell universes and i have seen what the bleep do we know anyways. well atleast the part about the interference pattern and it not reacting a certain way when a camera was present. creepy shit man.

[mrdevious]

what the bleep do we know anyway is excellent

and so is the discovery channels movie.


i've watched both.
not sure of the discovery channels name for its movie though.

bleh, What The Bleep Do We Know is getting annoying, so many young impressional college kids are practically making it their religion and talking as though it's the most amazing thing that ever challenged their brain. I'm not saying I disagree with the movie, because I actually agree with most of it, but it really only scratches the surface of what I've already read in some basic quantum theory and interestingly enough, buddhism.

"The Secret", a recent movie from the same guys, had a really good message that I already believed myself but felt they really tightened up and clarified. If only it didn't run rampant with corniness.


I'm gonna have to check out string theory, it sounds really interesting and I've barely scratched the surface. Apparently it also resolves a long-standing conflict with special relativity and quantum mechanics.

[Matt the Funk]

I have my own sorta philosophy on that involves the string theory,infinity, and energy.

[jsn9333]

A few people i know have taken advanced string theory as their belief.


What is everyone's views on it as a belief?

Do you take it as a religious belief or a scientific belief? My understanding is that string theory is a scientific topic rather then a spiritual one. It deals with trying to understand the physics behind that which we observe, rather then any spiritual dimension of life.

[BoilerUp]

Do you take it as a religious belief or a scientific belief? My understanding is that string theory is a scientific topic rather then a spiritual one. It deals with trying to understand the physics behind that which we observe, rather then any spiritual dimension of life.

The way that this is involved is because it unravels the beginning of time as we know it. It proves that the plane of existence is composed of an infinite number of parallel dimensions. It proves that the big bang, or the creation of our universe, was the aftermath of two parallel dimensions colliding. At least that is how I remember the explanation of it. If this is scientific fact, then it rules out the possibility of a god creating this universe.

[Staurm]

bleh, What The Bleep Do We Know is getting annoying, so many young impressional college kids are practically making it their religion and talking as though it's the most amazing thing that ever challenged their brain. I'm not saying I disagree with the movie, because I actually agree with most of it, but it really only scratches the surface of what I've already read in some basic quantum theory and interestingly enough, buddhism.

Wise words old man. I've sat and listened to people going on about paths and stuff and quoting this film, made me laugh. It's quite interesting but there's a whole load of stuff they missed out, and instead decided to include some annoying story with this deaf girl going on a journey or something.

Fritjof Capra apparently has a film out depicted some of his theories
called Mindwalk, wouldn't mind checking that out sometime, he is one of my favourite writers. Anyone see this?

Fritjof Capra - Mindwalk (http://www.fritjofcapra.net/mindwalk.html)

[jsn9333]

The way that this is involved is because it unravels the beginning of time as we know it. It proves that the plane of existence is composed of an infinite number of parallel dimensions. It proves that the big bang, or the creation of our universe, was the aftermath of two parallel dimensions colliding. At least that is how I remember the explanation of it. If this is scientific fact, then it rules out the possibility of a god creating this universe.

Christianity and creation are not beliefs that are in conflict with the Big Bang. You've heard the the joke, "I believe in the Big Bang: *Bang*... God created it." Well, not only is it not that funny, but it isn't even a joke. Who is to say that an infinite God could not use an infinite number of parallel dimensions outside of space and time as we know it to create a collision resulting in creation?

There are *a lot* of Christians that believe the "7 days" of creation in Genesis actually represent much longer periods of time. In fact, the zealots will never remind you of this, but if you look up the Hebrew word for "day" in the Genesis account you will find it can actually mean any length of time.

Most astrologers (Christian and non-Chrisitan) today believe in the Big Bang. That is a fact. It is not at odds with Christianity in any way, shape or form.

[Delta9 UK]

String theory is pretty much philosophy imho as it's almost unfalsifiable - we are unlikely to be able to prove it either way for the forseeable future.

[Hardcore Newbie]

Christianity and creation are not beliefs that are in conflict with the Big Bang. You've heard the the joke, "I believe in the Big Bang: *Bang*... God created it." Well, not only is it not that funny, but it isn't even a joke. Who is to say that an infinite God could not use an infinite number of parallel dimensions outside of space and time as we know it to create a collision resulting in creation?

There are *a lot* of Christians that believe the "7 days" of creation in Genesis actually represent much longer periods of time. In fact, the zealots will never remind you of this, but if you look up the Hebrew word for "day" in the Genesis account you will find it can actually mean any length of time.

Most astrologers (Christian and non-Chrisitan) today believe in the Big Bang. That is a fact. It is not at odds with Christianity in any way, shape or form.
In a way I somewhat agree, because most people do believe in a big bang of sorts, but there are those who do take the word very literally.

The problem that non-believers have with words of god, is that the story is always changing yet the book remains the same. It says God created the heavens and the stars, but when someone says "Alternate dimensions collided, creating this big bang"... the Bible doesn't say that happened. The Bible also didn't say that it *didn't* happen, So people will fill in with "Maybe God did it that way". I'm not saying there's no God, but I AM saying that Biblical texts are no more proof than mere observation.

[wayoftheleaf]

I meant they took it as a belief system of infinite possibilities. You can't truly predict anything, because we can't prove that we are in a universe where it doesn't change. Therefore anything could happen after death. Anything can happen in life.

At least that is the way i took it.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

WayOfTheLeaf, did you take your username from the Wheel Of Time book The Eye Of The World? If so that's awsome!:D I'm reading it myself right now.

[wayoftheleaf]

i took it from the entire series my friend :) i love it. read all eleven books on the upper half of ten times. Reading the first one again right now.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Entire series eh? So the leaf people are coming back, that's interesting. I'm only just near the end of the first book for the first time. Seems I discovered the series late. Please don't tell me anything though!

[wayoftheleaf]

lol i won't. I swear to god if robert jordan dies from the blood disease he has before finishing the last book i will do something insane. I have no idea what. But it will prolly be on television and make you go wtf.

The last book he said he didn't care if it was 2000-6000 pages and you had to carry it in a wheelbarrow, he is only writing one more.

[Oneironaut]

What The Bleep Do We Know and The Secret are both full of shit. Sorry to burst your bubble, guys, but you can't change the physical universe just using your thoughts. It doesn't work that way. If you want to change things, you can only do it by controlling your muscles with your nervous system. You can't think the world better. You have to actually get up off your ass and do something.

I would recommend this rant (http://www.logicallycritical.net/podcast/23%20Secretly_%20Unimaginatively%20Selfish.mp3) if you want to learn more about how The Secret is BS.

[Pass That Shit]

I believe in the big bang theory also.

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." :jointsmile:

Can you image the power of the sun just appearing? It must have been a BIG bang.

[wayoftheleaf]

Oneironaut, do you have any links to a scientific research proving otherwise?

I'm really not trying to be an ass, i just havn't heard much objection to what the movie presents other than opinions. If anyone has any facts against it i TRULY want to see them.

[Oneironaut]

Actually, there were no photons and hence no light until about 380,000 years after the Big Bang.

Cosmic microwave background radiation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMB)

[Oneironaut]

Oneironaut, do you have any links to a scientific research proving otherwise?

I'm really not trying to be an ass, i just havn't heard much objection to what the movie presents other than opinions. If anyone has any facts against it i TRULY want to see them.
Umm, it's common sense. You can't just change the world with your thoughts. If you want to prove me wrong, cure cancer with your thoughts, or make a ham sandwich with your thoughts. Do anything with just your thoughts and I will be convinced. Do you have any scientific research proving I can't shoot laser beams out of my eyes if I stare at the Moon for eight hours straight? No, but that doesn't mean you should take me seriously if I make an outrageous claim like that. You should ask me to prove it before you take it seriously.

[wayoftheleaf]

The cosmic microwave background is a prediction of Big Bang theory. In the theory, the early universe was made up of a hot plasma of photons, electrons and baryons. The photons were constantly interacting with the plasma through Thomson scattering. As the universe expanded, adiabatic cooling caused the plasma to cool until it became favourable for electrons to combine with protons and form hydrogen atoms. This happened at around 3,000 K or when the universe was approximately 380,000 years old (z=1088). At this point, the photons did not scatter off of the now neutral atoms and began to travel freely through space. This process is called recombination or decoupling (referring to electrons combining with nuclei and to the decoupling of matter and radiation respectively).


That is the paragraph right?

It says:

The cosmic microwave background is a prediction of Big Bang theory. In the theory, the early universe was made up of a hot plasma of photons, electrons and baryons. The photons were constantly interacting with the plasma through Thomson scattering

That means there were photons before the 380000 year mark, but they were constantly interacting with the plasma until then, when it cooled enough to form hydrogen atoms.

correct me if I am wrong, I was just repeating it and i may be misunderstanding it completely

[Oneironaut]

I stand corrected. There were photons around, but you wouldn't have been able to see anything because they were just bouncing all over the place randomly. Well, you wouldn't have been able to see anything anyways because there was no place habitable for life, or even a hardy video camera.

[jsn9333]

I don't think the story of the Bible is always changing. I mean, sure it leaves open the question of how God *exactly* created the universe... but that doesn't mean it changes. It just means it leaves that particular aspect of creation open for some discussion (hopefully friendly discussion... though some people get out of hand).

What I'm saying is, no one can look at the Christian Scriptures and see it saying God created the earth one day and then see it saying God didn't create the earth the next. I will agree that biblical texts are not scientific proof of anything. However, they are full of religious proof when practiced. If one starts practicing the teachings of Christ he will see the types of results the Word of God promises. And those teachings do not change. They have been practiced by Christians since Christ first uttered them.


In a way I somewhat agree, because most people do believe in a big bang of sorts, but there are those who do take the word very literally.

The problem that non-believers have with words of god, is that the story is always changing yet the book remains the same. It says God created the heavens and the stars, but when someone says "Alternate dimensions collided, creating this big bang"... the Bible doesn't say that happened. The Bible also didn't say that it *didn't* happen, So people will fill in with "Maybe God did it that way". I'm not saying there's no God, but I AM saying that Biblical texts are no more proof than mere observation.

[wayoftheleaf]

It isn't about the bible always changing, it is about the infinite amount of possibilities due to the infinite amount of universes.

[Staurm]

Sorry to burst your bubble, guys, but you can't change the physical universe just using your thoughts. .

Our thoughts and perceptions ARE the universe.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I think The Secret has the right idea, but blown way out of proportion. Think about the placebo effect. A lot of people think it just means tricking yourself into the illusion of wellness. In many cases it is; however, it can also initiate some pretty powerfull healing as effective or more as any medicine. I remember one fellow who completely cured himself of a deadly cancer (I wish I could remember which one, but it's been years) that by all rights should have killed him. He overcame it, according to him, by intense and prolonged meditation aimed at the intention of getting better.
Another, probably better example, is in my psychology class when we learned how when a pack animal suddenly topples the pack leader and aserts his dominance, his muscle mass increases at unprecedented rates upward of 50, which they attribute to the mental projection of dominance.
I'm sure many of us have seen some taichi masters, little guys, who can take the biggest punch from the biggest guy and not be moved. Or in other cases have 5 men try to move him and be completely unable to.
There was a really neat video on Ebaumsworld I saw where an old chinese guy, some sort of martial arts master, could stand on his index finger alone.

None of these things I attribute to mystical waves eminating from our thoughts, altering our reality by perception, but by controlling the brain and the nervous system to such a degree that the human body and mind shouldn't normally be capable of. After all, when you look at the eastern philosophy of "chi", it really seems like a primitive (and in some ways more advanced) understanding of the nervous system.

When you get right down to the nuts and bolts, the energetic potential that forms our brains, bodies, and all other mass, are all made of the same thing carrying out different tasks to create the whole. As my best friend, who's a 3rd year physics major described, all matter is essentially made up of light. But you have to keep in mind that when you think of light, you're thinking of your perception of light, and that perception is merely the effect of light. The actual forces that form light are the same forces that form all the atoms in all matter, and the same forces that create an electrical neuron firing in your brain, central, and peripheral nervous systems.

And thus I do hold to the belief that through deep contemplation, meditation, and understanding through rigerous practice, the mind can be developed to strip down the illusionary barriers that separate "us" from the "external" existence. When we do that, we can have a great deal of control over what happens in our bodies, in our minds, how we affect our external reality, and how we let it affect us.

[BoilerUp]

Umm, it's common sense. You can't just change the world with your thoughts. If you want to prove me wrong, cure cancer with your thoughts, or make a ham sandwich with your thoughts. Do anything with just your thoughts and I will be convinced.

This is debated, and I actually believe thought helps to some extent. One example of this is the research done by a Japanese scientist, Masaru Emoto. He presented a live experiment to a large group. What he did was take two jars full of identical water. One he hid off stage, and another he placed on stage. He told the audience to focus their prayers toward the water that was placed on stage. After some amount of time of prayers, both jars were taken to be crystallized. When they came out, the water with prayers sent to it had a much different physical shape to it than the one which didn't receive prayers.

Here is a link to the water experiment: KRYON - Hamburg water experiment (http://kryon.com/hamburgwater.html)

Other experiments include raising the PH of water by simply have meditations focused towards it. Now I will admit this effect is very minimal, but you can't rule it out as not existing.

[wayoftheleaf]

there was a test done where a large group of people in washington D.C. meditated for long periods of time on crime decreasing, and it decreased by 25%(or close to this number, i strongly believe it was in the 20 percentile range)

[couch-potato]

I highly recommend A Briefer History of Time by Stephen Hawking for anyone who is remotely interested in this topic. Go get it. Read it. Now.













Now.

[wayoftheleaf]

How about a brief history of time? Isn't a briefer history just a condensed form of a brief history? That is what I thought, or are they two different books? i'll check out both just incase.

[Hardcore Newbie]

I don't think the story of the Bible is always changing. I mean, sure it leaves open the question of how God *exactly* created the universe... but that doesn't mean it changes. It just means it leaves that particular aspect of creation open for some discussion (hopefully friendly discussion... though some people get out of hand).

What I'm saying is, no one can look at the Christian Scriptures and see it saying God created the earth one day and then see it saying God didn't create the earth the next. I will agree that biblical texts are not scientific proof of anything. However, they are full of religious proof when practiced. If one starts practicing the teachings of Christ he will see the types of results the Word of God promises. And those teachings do not change. They have been practiced by Christians since Christ first uttered them.I love good hearted discussion :D I don't like it when things get hostile, so good clean and kind natured discussion is always preferred by me :)

My father's side of my family is religious, I mean *very* religious, and they constantly want me to become a preacher for the word of god because they "see god" in me, for whatever reason. I am *constantly* having discussions with them about my beliefs, but that doesn't make it any less fun and informing to converse with other people about the same thing.

Ok, so after all of that.... I made a stament "the Bible is always changing", and what I meant by that was, the Bible obviously can't change, because it's allegedly the word of God, and the alleged word of God is infallible. But when something contradicts the word of God, the meaning instantly changes so that the words still hold ground.


For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you. This verse tells me that nothing is impossible if you are armed with even the smallest faith. I have none, so it's impossible for me to move mountains, but surely a few people on earth must have had enough faith to move a mountain.

Since we can't move mountains on prayer alone, there has to be an excuse as to why the mountains aren't constantly being moved by men of little faith. "You're asking too much", or "The request is too trivial" or something, when in fact the prayer should be regarded as a test in faith.

[couch-potato]

How about a brief history of time? Isn't a briefer history just a condensed form of a brief history? That is what I thought, or are they two different books? i'll check out both just incase.


The original (brief) is cluttered with equations and advanced relative calculus and whatnot. Either one is good, but I chose briefer since I fucking hate math but would still love to comprehend what Hawking is writing.

[wayoftheleaf]

I actually have to dispute one fact in What the bleep do we know anyway.

A man says that in the bible it is said that the entire kingdom of heaven could fit into a mustard seed.

This isn't true, what he is referring to(i believe) is the passage in which it is said *the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed* or something like that. but it is basically saying that something very small could grow to something large. you could take that a few ways, but i don't think it can be taken how he described it.

[wayoftheleaf]

Thanks couch-potato, i have been meaning to read them anyway.

[Hardcore Newbie]

I'm sure many of us have seen some taichi masters, little guys, who can take the biggest punch from the biggest guy and not be moved. Or in other cases have 5 men try to move him and be completely unable to.
There was a really neat video on Ebaumsworld I saw where an old chinese guy, some sort of martial arts master, could stand on his index finger alone.This in particular doesn't come from the mind alone, this comes from the fact that these people dedicate their entire lives to performing these feats, and in all the tests I've ever seen, no one over punches the monks in the face or pokes them in the eye, because that's not what they have trained their entire lives to defend against.

Also on the flipside, I've also seen videos of "Dim Mak" masters who claim to disrupt the chi flow of other people at a distance, claim to be undefeated. YouTube - Kung Fu master gets owned (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QucOnlQW2nQ)
Watch him get punched in the face and get a "time out" because he'd never actually been hit before. People will make ridiculous claims at times.

But add another one to the list, the idea that four 10 year olds can lift a car off of a person who is in danger. People can do extraordinary things at times.

[jsn9333]

Ok, so after all of that.... I made a stament "the Bible is always changing", and what I meant by that was, the Bible obviously can't change, because it's allegedly the word of God, and the alleged word of God is infallible. But when something contradicts the word of God, the meaning instantly changes so that the words still hold ground.


I see what you're saying. The *actual* meaning does not change... people just change their interpretations of the particular verse in question. And I agree to a certain extent. There are verses that have a range of interpretation... in other words reasonable people can disagree. However, in my opinion, there are also many verses that are sufficiently clear enough to lead the reader to the truth. The way I see it is that the Bible is not the answer to all of life's questions. It is the guidebook to help us find the One who does hold the answers. (That being said, I think it also answer very man questions quite directly.)



This verse tells me that nothing is impossible if you are armed with even the smallest faith. I have none, so it's impossible for me to move mountains, but surely a few people on earth must have had enough faith to move a mountain.

Since we can't move mountains on prayer alone, there has to be an excuse as to why the mountains aren't constantly being moved by men of little faith. "You're asking too much", or "The request is too trivial" or something, when in fact the prayer should be regarded as a test in faith.


Of this particular verse, the way most students of the Bible see it is similar to the way we see the verse where Christ says, "Pray for anything in my name and you will receive it." The number of people who have prayed for a new Ferrari, not gotten it, and then dismissed the entirety of the Bible is probably pretty big! But that isn't at all what Christ was saying if you read the context and try to gain understanding from other Scriptures talking about the same concept. Other verses refer to people not getting what they ask for, because they ask for it for themselves and not for the purpose of glorifying God in their lives and helping others. So, given that, we learn "in my name" probably doesn't mean to simply utter the name of Christ, but it means to ask with Christ's purposes and goals and everything he stood for... to ask with "His Name" in mind and heart. So the meaning does not "change", rather the first interpretation was just wrong, and the second one is the meaning that is supported by other verses so it is probably the right one. Any unbeliever who gets frustrated by that verse is really just frustrated that it takes time, hard work, study, and experience to gain a firm understanding of many Biblical concepts. And that can be frustrating in today's age of "instant gratification".

So, regarding the verse about moving mountains, I don't think the excuses as to why we don't see mountains move all the time are really all that extreme. I mean, number one, Christ is likely making an analogy to some extent, to make a point. He teaches about his practical goals for Christians many times in the Bible, but never says his goal for Christians is to move mountains even though they perhaps could. Just because, "nothing will be impossible," doesn't mean one with that kind of faith would feel led to do everything possible (like moving mountains). For instance, Christ obviously had faith enough to do "supernatural" things. But he didn't waste time moving mountains around for fun or even for "good" purposes. So that in and of itself shows someone with strong enough faith, even though they in theory "can" move mountains, might still not necessarily be led by God to do it.

Or perhaps none of us who believe have even have enough faith to do it... or perhaps the reasons you gave above are the correct interpretations...

You are totally right that there can be multiple interpretations, and I understand how frustrating that can be. But at some point, I just decided to get as much as I can from the Bible by studying it over a long period of time, and leave some questions unanswered. I think anyone is able to come up with a reasonable understanding of God by studying the Bible. I know I feel that I have.

It takes a few things
1) An at least semi-open heart (if you're goal is to just find potential contradictions then you'll find plenty and just throw the whole thing out as a lie)

2) Time. Probably at least a year of reading through it 15-20 minutes a day, preferably with some sort of a study guide.

[Hardcore Newbie]

I see what you're saying. The *actual* meaning does not change... people just change their interpretations of the particular verse in question. And I agree to a certain extent. There are verses that have a range of interpretation... in other words reasonable people can disagree. However, in my opinion, there are also many verses that are sufficiently clear enough to lead the reader to the truth. The way I see it is that the Bible is not the answer to all of life's questions. It is the guidebook to help us find the One who does hold the answers. (That being said, I think it also answer very man questions quite directly.)

Here's what I don't get, though. Shouldn't every verse in the Bible be unequivocal about the things that it does speak? I understand that one book can't hold the answer to every question one can ask, but of the questions that it does answer, every answer should be clear and concise.


Of this particular verse, the way most students of the Bible see it is similar to the way we see the verse where Christ says, "Pray for anything in my name and you will receive it." The number of people who have prayed for a new Ferrari, not gotten it, and then dismissed the entirety of the Bible is probably pretty big! But that isn't at all what Christ was saying if you read the context and try to gain understanding from other Scriptures talking about the same concept. Other verses refer to people not getting what they ask for, because they ask for it for themselves and not for the purpose of glorifying God in their lives and helping others. So, given that, we learn "in my name" probably doesn't mean to simply utter the name of Christ, but it means to ask with Christ's purposes and goals and everything he stood for... to ask with "His Name" in mind and heart. So the meaning does not "change", rather the first interpretation was just wrong, and the second one is the meaning that is supported by other verses so it is probably the right one. Any unbeliever who gets frustrated by that verse is really just frustrated that it takes time, hard work, study, and experience to gain a firm understanding of many Biblical concepts. And that can be frustrating in today's age of "instant gratification".

So, regarding the verse about moving mountains, I don't think the excuses as to why we don't see mountains move all the time are really all that extreme. I mean, number one, Christ is likely making an analogy to some extent, to make a point. He teaches about his practical goals for Christians many times in the Bible, but never says his goal for Christians is to move mountains even though they perhaps could. Just because, "nothing will be impossible," doesn't mean one with that kind of faith would feel led to do everything possible (like moving mountains). For instance, Christ obviously had faith enough to do "supernatural" things. But he didn't waste time moving mountains around for fun or even for "good" purposes. So that in and of itself shows someone with strong enough faith, even though they in theory "can" move mountains, might still not necessarily be led by God to do it.

Or perhaps none of us who believe have even have enough faith to do it... or perhaps the reasons you gave above are the correct interpretations...

You are totally right that there can be multiple interpretations, and I understand how frustrating that can be. But at some point, I just decided to get as much as I can from the Bible by studying it over a long period of time, and leave some questions unanswered. I think anyone is able to come up with a reasonable understanding of God by studying the Bible. I know I feel that I have.

It takes a few things
1) An at least semi-open heart (if you're goal is to just find potential contradictions then you'll find plenty and just throw the whole thing out as a lie)

2) Time. Probably at least a year of reading through it 15-20 minutes a day, preferably with some sort of a study guide.

I've read the Bible many times in my childhood, and regularly read verses with my grandma and her side of the family, and I thoroughly enjoy it :D

In my mind, and there is also a verse in the Bible that tells me this, is that if any word in the Bible is a lie (or untrue) then the rest should be made so as well. So as soon as I see an inconstancy, I should disregard it. I still read it for reasons other than finding God, but I'm not reading it "just to find those inconsistencies". I read it so that I can share some of my family's time, because the Bible is their life.

What I can't, and I am unwilling to do, is live my life by the Bible when there are certain aspects that just don't make sense to me. Also, unfortunately I question anyone that does, not because I want to attack their faith, or that I believe their stupid, or anything of the sort. I just find it hard to believe that faith in Jesus is the only way into the kingdom.

Jesus really only had two 'commandments', Love thy God and Love thy Neighbour. I've got #2 down pat, but I am unwilling to believe that God would punish me for not believing in Him, and that I should be tortured for eternity because I have either been given, or acquired a mind that doesn't allow me to comprehend His words as truth. It doesn't seem fair to me, and because of this unfairness, I cannot and will not believe.

If God came to me and told me that His word was true, and even personally gave me a Bible with His autograph, I'd be very disheartened, because I know that i can't save everyone, and no matter how good they are, they're going to be tortured for eternity, just because I know something that they don't.

[jsn9333]

of the questions that it does answer, every answer should be clear and concise.

God has reasons for leaving some things vague. Sometimes it is to actually confuse people who have rejected Him permanently anyway... think of it as the beginning of their punishment. Jesus even told the disciples he spoke in sometimes confusing parables so that only those who were seeking after Him would understand. Sometimes it is simply to make us dig deeper to learn more about Him and come to rely on Him more. It could be any number of reasons really. But I understand how it can be frustrating. I've been confused by some verses and believed wrong on some pretty important things before... and I just have to trust God had a reason for letting me be confused for a while.



I just find it hard to believe that faith in Jesus is the only way into the kingdom... but I am unwilling to believe that God would punish me for not believing in Him, and that I should be tortured for eternity because I have either been given, or acquired a mind that doesn't allow me to comprehend His words as truth. It doesn't seem fair to me, and because of this unfairness, I cannot and will not believe.


I don't believe that those who reject faith in God are eternally tortured. Some Christians believe Hell will come to the end, and that those in it will cease to exist. I tend toward that belief. I believe God will punish them and, unless they have faith in Christ which leads them to follow His commandments, they will not have eternal life. They will suffer punishment in hell, and then cease to exist... what I refer to as eternal death. I can see why some people think hell will last for an eternity, but there are verses in which "forever" simply means for a lifetime. For instance, Duet. chapter 15 says, "He shall be your servant forever," of a servant who simply would serve you for the rest of his life.

I don't think it is unfair for God to punish someone who refuses to love God and God's ways. He created them after all! How could anyone say that is not fair? It would be ridiculous. If he really did create them, then God is fair in punishing them and removing them from his presence if they refuse to follow His rules. And they wouldn't be happy with God in eternal life anyway, since they hate His ways. So why should he make them suffer with Him and His ways forever?

As far as Christ being the only way to heaven, He definitely taught that. There is no getting around that. The only thing I can do is trust that He knows what He is doing. The Bible does teach that He is gathering all who will believe to Himself. I just trust that He is doing that. I went to Iran on a mission trip with a couple of my believer friends once, just to talk to people and exchange religious thoughts. An Iranian man told me that Christ came to his great-grandfather in a dream, and that his whole family has been Christian since that time (and I shit you not, no missionaries had ever been to his area of the country). After hearing that, I have no doubt that Christ, even though He is the only way to the Father, can reach whomever he wants whenever he wants and present them with the Truth, giving them the choice of whether or not to follow Him.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

This in particular doesn't come from the mind alone, this comes from the fact that these people dedicate their entire lives to performing these feats, and in all the tests I've ever seen, no one over punches the monks in the face or pokes them in the eye, because that's not what they have trained their entire lives to defend against.



I think you're missing the point of what I was saying my good fellow. The TaiChi masters aren't immune or unmoved by punches, the whole point is exactly what you were saying, that they trained their whole lives. It is by training a certain aspect of the mind or body that it can become more powerful than would normally be possible. There's more to being unmoved by 5 men, or standing on a finger, than just strength; there's a certain understanding through training of how to manipulate energy to ones advantage. That's kinetic energy btw, not mystical floaty energy that the Jedi strangle people with ;)

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Wait wait, now I'm misrepresenting the Jedi, bad analogy. Lets use reiki energy as a comparrison instead.

[Hardcore Newbie]

God has reasons for leaving some things vague. Sometimes it is to actually confuse people who have rejected Him permanently anyway... think of it as the beginning of their punishment. Jesus even told the disciples he spoke in sometimes confusing parables so that only those who were seeking after Him would understand. Sometimes it is simply to make us dig deeper to learn more about Him and come to rely on Him more. It could be any number of reasons really. But I understand how it can be frustrating. I've been confused by some verses and believed wrong on some pretty important things before... and I just have to trust God had a reason for letting me be confused for a while.

If I had genuine concern for all the people on earth, I'd make sure that people understood exactly what I was saying, I wouldn't try to confuse anybody. Christ and myself seem to have very different ways of thinking. We both are very loving, but if I had a secret that would allow for the salvation of mankind, I don't see why I would talk in riddles. I'd also question the motives of the person who is deliberately confusing.


I don't believe that those who reject faith in God are eternally tortured. Some Christians believe Hell will come to the end, and that those in it will cease to exist. I tend toward that belief. I believe God will punish them and, unless they have faith in Christ which leads them to follow His commandments, they will not have eternal life. They will suffer punishment in hell, and then cease to exist... what I refer to as eternal death. I can see why some people think hell will last for an eternity, but there are verses in which "forever" simply means for a lifetime. For instance, Duet. chapter 15 says, "He shall be your servant forever," of a servant who simply would serve you for the rest of his life.

Even that punishment seems harsh and unfair, see further for why.


I don't think it is unfair for God to punish someone who refuses to love God and God's ways. He created them after all! How could anyone say that is not fair? It would be ridiculous. If he really did create them, then God is fair in punishing them and removing them from his presence if they refuse to follow His rules. And they wouldn't be happy with God in eternal life anyway, since they hate His ways. So why should he make them suffer with Him and His ways forever?

I have a somewhat sadistic proposal of parents leaving a huge tablet on the fridge for their children to read. After 18 years, the children are either punished or "forgiven" depending on what they've done, but they are given no proof that the tablet is "real", nor have they ever talked to the maker of this tablet. If they break the rules on the tablet, they are not immediately punished, and when they succeed in following the rules, they are given no immediate rewards.

The parents have set up a torture device for the disobedient, and something fun for the obedient. Even if the disobedient was a decent person, and didn't believe in the tablet (one of the requirements) that child is tortured for the rest of their life. The parents feel justified in doing this because they created the child.

Yeah, it's a sadistic example but if does quite sum up the way I feel. Just because I don't believe in His word, if his word is true, I'll be tortured. I don't get to heaven, nor would I want to, as heaven would be very constricting to my nature. The only alternative is hell, and because Christ doesn't allow me into heaven, since I wouldn't want that anyways, the only other place to go is Hell. That doesn't seem fair either. I question the very nature of these rules, and I believe that I am doing so with good reason.


As far as Christ being the only way to heaven, He definitely taught that. There is no getting around that. The only thing I can do is trust that He knows what He is doing. The Bible does teach that He is gathering all who will believe to Himself. I just trust that He is doing that. I went to Iran on a mission trip with a couple of my believer friends once, just to talk to people and exchange religious thoughts. An Iranian man told me that Christ came to his great-grandfather in a dream, and that his whole family has been Christian since that time (and I shit you not, no missionaries had ever been to his area of the country). After hearing that, I have no doubt that Christ, even though He is the only way to the Father, can reach whomever he wants whenever he wants and present them with the Truth, giving them the choice of whether or not to follow Him.You say the only thing you can do is trust, the only thing i can find myself to do is question. Why? If you were to say that heaven is a gift, that I can understand. It's his gift to do with as He pleases, and if believing in Him and following his word is the way to accept the gift, that works. But you don't punish someone you love for not accepting their gift with torture, not matter how brief or how lengthly the torture.

"here's a bracelet, because I love you"
"aww thanks, you shouldn't have, but I'm allergic to gold, and I can't accept your gift"
*SMACK*

Again, I have a mind, whether given to me, or through acquiring, that does not allow me to just accept this word as truth. I don't feel as if I should be punished for doing so, and have trouble believing that an all knowing all powerful being would use such rationale.

I say this without ill will or malice, but such a divine being seems petty to me. I am a person that needs to know the logic behind the rules. I don't consider myself to be a bad person, even tho I'm a marijuana smoker. I give that law no rule over me, because I disagree with the fundamental principles behind it. If I am caught breaking this rule, I will be punished. But the government isn't an all powerful, all knowing being, it's simply there to take my money. I hold an all powerful, all knowing creator of the universe to a higher standard than the government. Why does He need my faith so desperately that if he doesn't get it he will punish me for it?

[Hardcore Newbie]

I think you're missing the point of what I was saying my good fellow. The TaiChi masters aren't immune or unmoved by punches, the whole point is exactly what you were saying, that they trained their whole lives. It is by training a certain aspect of the mind or body that it can become more powerful than would normally be possible. There's more to being unmoved by 5 men, or standing on a finger, than just strength; there's a certain understanding through training of how to manipulate energy to ones advantage. That's kinetic energy btw, not mystical floaty energy that the Jedi strangle people with ;) :) I'd love to see the "unmovable man" demonstration. I'm very into mixed martial arts myself, and I find it difficult to believe that no one could move him. You think someone would just pick him up.

Standing on a finger would be a combination of technique, strength, practise and perseverance. If this is what you mean by "the mind can become more powerful" then yes, I subscribe to that theory. I don't subscribe to a theory that would have someone do the physically impossible. If someone trained their entire life to fly by flapping their arms, they'd have to make some drastic physical modifications to themselves and develop MAD endurance to pull it off. It wouldn't be "just" the thought that's doing it, it's all the training they put in.

[Staurm]

Hawkings is over rated. Just because he defied illness and disabilty with such commendable adroitness doesn't make the man a genius. Fritjof Capra has some far more progressive and interesting ideas, I reccommend any of his books, especially The Web of Life.

[sam44]

There was a great special on PBS about it. Its an interesting theory.

But I want you guys to think about somthing.

What we define as science, as pure "fact", is constantly changing. Just because our model of the world (that it is composed of countless tiny protons, neutrons, and electrons) seems like fact, the human race will have a totally different perspective on it thousands of years from now. Just as we did thousands of years ago. In actuality, we are only scratching the surface of the secrets that make up our universe. As technology and the human race evolve, we will see the world a whole different way. The "laws" that supposedly govern our universe will be obsolete.

Assuming we dont blow ourselves up before then. :thumbsup:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

:) I'd love to see the "unmovable man" demonstration. I'm very into mixed martial arts myself, and I find it difficult to believe that no one could move him. You think someone would just pick him up.

I've watched a few demonstrations actually, it was some impressive stuff. I'm not saying though, that he literally can't be moved by any means. I'm just talking about getting 5 guys to try and push him to make him take one step from his spot, which they couldn't.

That's cool you're into mixed martial arts btw, I was really into Judo and Aikido myself before I messed up my spine and had to quit. Which martial arts do you specialize in?


Standing on a finger would be a combination of technique, strength, practise and perseverance. If this is what you mean by "the mind can become more powerful" then yes, I subscribe to that theory. I don't subscribe to a theory that would have someone do the physically impossible. If someone trained their entire life to fly by flapping their arms, they'd have to make some drastic physical modifications to themselves and develop MAD endurance to pull it off. It wouldn't be "just" the thought that's doing it, it's all the training they put in.


Yep, you pretty much understand what I mean now. Indeed nobody can train hard and long enough and jump 100 feet into the air, or in your example flap their arms to fly. What I'm talking about is accomplishing normal human feats, to far abnormal degrees. Do you ever watch Chris Angel on Mindfreak? He does some of the physical stuff I'm talking about, like him being a 160 lb man picking up that taxi, or having a truck run over him.... lol, I'm not sure how he walked down the side of that building since he stepped off it and walked away.



BTW, why did somebody give me bad rep on my first post with a comment of "good post":wtf:

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

EDIT: the rep said "well said". again ----->:wtf:

[wayoftheleaf]

Advanced string theory(i believe) states:

There are an infinite amount of universes(picture these as bubbles or such floating through nothingness, this isn't accurate most likely but i am just trying to create an illusion)Yet on each universe(i think this is what it said)there are an infinite amount of universes overlapping one another.

I believe that is what it states, and what makes it so wonderous.

basically there are infinite amount of other universes. But at the same time there are an infinite amount of (something not sure of word)on this dimension, imagine this world, but different, and on this world as well. we just can't see it. it's like the idea of different timelines proposed by john titor.

[Hardcore Newbie]

I've watched a few demonstrations actually, it was some impressive stuff. I'm not saying though, that he literally can't be moved by any means. I'm just talking about getting 5 guys to try and push him to make him take one step from his spot, which they couldn't.

That's cool you're into mixed martial arts btw, I was really into Judo and Aikido myself before I messed up my spine and had to quit. Which martial arts do you specialize in?

Yep, you pretty much understand what I mean now. Indeed nobody can train hard and long enough and jump 100 feet into the air, or in your example flap their arms to fly. What I'm talking about is accomplishing normal human feats, to far abnormal degrees. Do you ever watch Chris Angel on Mindfreak? He does some of the physical stuff I'm talking about, like him being a 160 lb man picking up that taxi, or having a truck run over him.... lol, I'm not sure how he walked down the side of that building since he stepped off it and walked away.

BTW, why did somebody give me bad rep on my first post with a comment of "good post":wtf:
Judo's pretty cool, I'm into mixed martial arts, but I've trained in JiuJitsu and a small stint in muay thai

But Chris Angel apparantly uses a lot of camera tricks. That and he steals everyone else's tricks. My Roommate's a magician and I know a few decent tricks. But yeah, Chris Angel is an ass. Some magician created a convincing illusion of walking on water, with an audience in the pool. He didn't want to tell anyone, but CA convinced him to tell, but if CA used it or profited from it in any way shape or form, the magician would sue him for 6 million dollars. lo and behold, a few months later the trick is on his show, the magician calls him up and asks what's going on, and CA responds (paraphrased) "I do mine differently, and in order to prove that mine's different you'd have to show your trick to the courts, and everyone would know your secret. See you in court"

Pretty assholish eh?

But yeah it's hard to believe some of the stuff that he does, and there's obviously a way that he does it, but I'm a sceptic by nature. I highly doubt it's because he's training himself to such a high level that he can do these things, and more than likely due to them being "tricks". Highly sophisticated tricks, yes, but tricks nonetheless.

[wayoftheleaf]

idc if it isn't true or not, mindfreak is an awesome show to watch.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Judo's pretty cool, I'm into mixed martial arts, but I've trained in JiuJitsu and a small stint in muay thai


Cool, Those are a couple of my favorite martial arts. I definately would have taken Jiu Jitsu were it available, but I suppose Aikido and Judo are 2 offshoots of it anyway.


But Chris Angel apparantly uses a lot of camera tricks. That and he steals everyone else's tricks. My Roommate's a magician and I know a few decent tricks. But yeah, Chris Angel is an ass. Some magician created a convincing illusion of walking on water, with an audience in the pool. He didn't want to tell anyone, but CA convinced him to tell, but if CA used it or profited from it in any way shape or form, the magician would sue him for 6 million dollars. lo and behold, a few months later the trick is on his show, the magician calls him up and asks what's going on, and CA responds (paraphrased) "I do mine differently, and in order to prove that mine's different you'd have to show your trick to the courts, and everyone would know your secret. See you in court"

Pretty assholish eh?

But yeah it's hard to believe some of the stuff that he does, and there's obviously a way that he does it, but I'm a sceptic by nature. I highly doubt it's because he's training himself to such a high level that he can do these things, and more than likely due to them being "tricks". Highly sophisticated tricks, yes, but tricks nonetheless.


Wow, I had no idea angel could be such an asshole, he seems like a nice guy on his show! I won't jump to any judgements right off the bat though, we can't know all the details.
Honestly I think for his walking over the pool trick he just got some glass put on top, just under the surface, so people could still swim over him. For the camera tricks I don't know what's real and what's not, it's hard to tell. What particularily annoys me though is so many of his tricks where we have to assume that the people he's working with genuinly aren't working with him in secret. Like when that woman wrote down any item in the store, and he picked out that one item. I mean come on, I'm not impressed because I'm supposed to take his word for it that she's not in on it!

He does do some pretty cool physical stuff though. I know stuff that's supernatural, like walking down a building, are tricks of course. I was only referring to things that are more about physical strength and stamina.


I wish I could find some of those tai chi videos for you, but nothing's coming up. Have you ever watched the Shaolin Monks though? Now THAT is some amazing stuff! I'm pretty sure you can find them on youtube, google video, that sort of thing. What I wouldn't give to go to one of their shows!

[Hardcore Newbie]

I love watching shaolin monks :D:D

But yeah, if someone's using trickery to perform impossible feats, I have no reason to believe that the "possible but really hard" feats are anything but trickery. :(

YouTube - Chriss Angel - Exposed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dww9tbpHJg)

Good video but unfortunately it's very small.

YouTube - BEST Criss Angel's Illusion Revealed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBJct6CfW3I)(LOUD, TURN DOWN VOLUME)

If you know anything about the clone tool in photoshop or any smiliar editing program, the patterns near the end of the video in the clouds are VERY hard to deny. EDIT** (just after 7:20)

[jsn9333]

If I had genuine concern for all the people on earth, I'd make sure that people understood exactly what I was saying, I wouldn't try to confuse anybody. Christ and myself seem to have very different ways of thinking. We both are very loving, but if I had a secret that would allow for the salvation of mankind, I don't see why I would talk in riddles. I'd also question the motives of the person who is deliberately confusing.


The Bible says in Romans that God has made what may be known about him plain for everyone to know. It says His character and his qualities are evident in nature, and because of that no one has any excuse for "not knowing". Again, I am reminded of my experience with desert nomads who had dreams about Jesus with no missionary contact. But even if they had not had the dreams, the Bible teaches that they were without excuse based on the knowledge of God that is evident to all creation.

If anyone was deliberately confused by Christ through his teachings, it is because they have rejected His ways and He is beginning their punishment. So to question his motives for that is the same as questioning his motives for punishing those who are rebellious against him.



...that child is tortured for the rest of their life. The parents feel justified in doing this because they created the child.

Yeah, it's a sadistic example but if does quite sum up the way I feel. Just because I don't believe in His word, if his word is true, I'll be tortured. I don't get to heaven, nor would I want to, as heaven would be very constricting to my nature. The only alternative is hell, and because Christ doesn't allow me into heaven, since I wouldn't want that anyways, the only other place to go is Hell. That doesn't seem fair either. I question the very nature of these rules, and I believe that I am doing so with good reason.


I don't doubt your sincerity at all. It's just not your place to tell the Creator what is fair and what isn't. I don't mean to sound rude, and I understand your concerns. Don't get me wrong, it is always good to ask questions and deal with your conerns... but in the end you're viewpoint will not really matter all that much if you are the created and He is the Creator. Besides, again, God has said that what may be known about Him already has been made evident. So from His point of view He already has "proven" himself to you, and you have rejected Him.

The Bible says in the parable about Lazarus and the rich man that even if someone came back from the dead and "proved" God was true, the same people would still talk themselves out of the 'miracle' because they just would not agree with the principles of God. In other words, even if God did appear to you, you still wouldn't think his rules about hell and obedience are fair. And a "magic trick", even an amazing "impossible" one, doesn't really prove anything about the "fairness" of the magician. One way or the other, eventually you'll have to submit to God and acknowledge that "the rules" are His call and His call alone. Then, once you are following His rules and practicing His ways, you realize how good they actually are for you and you grow in love with him.

He has left us His Word as a way of "magically" reaching those of us who will believe and come back to him to be restored to peace and friendship with him.



... you don't punish someone you love for not accepting their gift with torture, not matter how brief or how lengthly the torture.


You've got it somewhat backwards. The punishment is what is deserved by all of us for rebellion and rejection of His ways and what was made known to us about Him. The gift is the offer of forgiveness. If you reject the gift you aren't then punished for rejecting the gift. You are punished for your rebellion, and it was your choice to reject the gift of amnesty He so graciously offered.



... Why does He need my faith so desperately that if he doesn't get it he will punish me for it?


He doesn't need your faith... rather you need to trust and love Him in order to be in a loving relationship with Him. Its really very basic. And He has given mankind a second chance even though we have rejected Him and turned our backs on His ways. If you, in your heart, continue to rebel against Him then He will not force you to reside with Him forever. Instead, you will go to where you want... separation from Him... a bad place since He is everything that is good.

I use the word "rebel" and "reject" not because I think you are a bad person... but rather because that is what it is called when someone disagrees with and dissents from the Authority. I know you have good intentions and I don't intend to call that into question. By the way, I smoke MJ too. I don't think use MJ is a sin since alcohol clearly is not and MJ is much less dangerous a drug. And I have an obligation under the United States constitution to dissent and try to change the government to justly represent the welfare and freedom of the people.

[Hardcore Newbie]

The Bible says in Romans that God has made what may be known about him plain for everyone to know. It says His character and his qualities are evident in nature, and because of that no one has any excuse for "not knowing". Again, I am reminded of my experience with desert nomads who had dreams about Jesus with no missionary contact. But even if they had not had the dreams, the Bible teaches that they were without excuse based on the knowledge of God that is evident to all creation.

If anyone was deliberately confused by Christ through his teachings, it is because they have rejected His ways and He is beginning their punishment. So to question his motives for that is the same as questioning his motives for punishing those who are rebellious against him.

I take issue with this. If i had knowledge of God, I'd certainly be inclined, to at least agree that God exists. I'd still probably take issue with his word, but that would be after my acknowledging that word is at least real, because it's been proven to me. This isn't the case. I agree that there may be a god that does exist, I have no way of knowing, at least at the moment, but these words do not make sense to me. Whether I know the words and disobey, or I know the words and cannot *truly* comprehend them because my logic differs from his word? I can not honestly answer that question. It *feels* like my logic telling me that this doesn't make sense, so I'm going with that for now.


I don't doubt your sincerity at all. It's just not your place to tell the Creator what is fair and what isn't. I don't mean to sound rude, and I understand your concerns. Don't get me wrong, it is always good to ask questions and deal with your conerns... but in the end you're viewpoint will not really matter all that much if you are the created and He is the Creator. Besides, again, God has said that what may be known about Him already has been made evident. So from His point of view He already has "proven" himself to you, and you have rejected Him. Can you see where this would also be frustrating to someone who is just trying to understand? All I'm trying to do is understand, and I've learned that it's not my place to show my my viewpoint is or isn't valid, and that my viewpoint doesn't really matter. You can see how this would be disheartening to someone just trying to understand, yes?

And no worries about "rudeness", I think we're being quite polite and having cordial conversation. I thoroughly enjoy the conversation :D


The Bible says in the parable about Lazarus and the rich man that even if someone came back from the dead and "proved" God was true, the same people would still talk themselves out of the 'miracle' because they just would not agree with the principles of God. In other words, even if God did appear to you, you still wouldn't think his rules about hell and obedience are fair. And a "magic trick", even an amazing "impossible" one, doesn't really prove anything about the "fairness" of the magician. One way or the other, eventually you'll have to submit to God and acknowledge that "the rules" are His call and His call alone. Then, once you are following His rules and practicing His ways, you realize how good they actually are for you and you grow in love with him..If god did reveal himself to me only to say "this body of words is my truth" and pointed to the Bible, I've already said i would be disheartened, because the rules to myself seem very unfair. Unfair that i don't know the reasoning behind the rules and my mind opposes these rules, and can't comprehend them. Maybe with this information, however, I have no reason to "not love god" because seeing Him was all that I needed to ignite that love. My concern tho, is for the people who, like me, wouldn't have this proof.

the magician thing is quite relevant tho, seeing as we're also talking about Chris Angel. If according to my mind, that these things are magic tricks, how can I believe one over another? I like the unequivocal, not something that can be explained another way.


You've got it somewhat backwards. The punishment is what is deserved by all of us for rebellion and rejection of His ways and what was made known to us about Him. The gift is the offer of forgiveness. If you reject the gift you aren't then punished for rejecting the gift. You are punished for your rebellion, and it was your choice to reject the gift of amnesty He so graciously offered. Why is it a deserved punishment? I reject the idea that I deserve punishment because I have the mind of a sceptic. Many people make many outlandish claims, and to choose one based on faith while rejecting all other claims is literally impossible for my mind to do.


He doesn't need your faith... rather you need to trust and love Him in order to be in a loving relationship with Him. Its really very basic. And He has given mankind a second chance even though we have rejected Him and turned our backs on His ways. If you, in your heart, continue to rebel against Him then He will not force you to reside with Him forever. Instead, you will go to where you want... separation from Him... a bad place since He is everything that is good.Again I take issue with this. If I don't take his word as my own and live by it, and just live close to what his word says without actually believing in His word, then the outcome is that I deserve no good. There's no actual middle ground, just torment and torture for those who do not accept his word as 100%, and heaven for those who do. I realize the benefit of loving your fellow man, but I apparantly get no credit from the creator for doing so, whether through his word or through my own discovery. It's like only the pure get salvation, and any shade of grey will not be tolerated.


I use the word "rebel" and "reject" not because I think you are a bad person... but rather because that is what it is called when someone disagrees with and dissents from the Authority. I know you have good intentions and I don't intend to call that into question. By the way, I smoke MJ too. I don't think use MJ is a sin since alcohol clearly is not and MJ is much less dangerous a drug. And I have an obligation under the United States constitution to dissent and try to change the government to justly represent the welfare and freedom of the people.I do rebel and reject, but it's not to what i consider an authority, it's to an idea that I find to be unjust. I know from His viewpoint, He is the authority

But the difference between government rule and His rule, is that the governments rule can and does change (no matter how oddly), and his rule by nature, can never change. If i take any issue with his word, there is no room for discussion, and for a man that likes to solve problems through discussion (and in most cases, compromise), it doesn't leave a guy a lot of hope.

Anyways, i've been watching way too much youtube, I'm off to bed, have a good night and I hope to continue with you some other time :thumbsup:

[wayoftheleaf]

I think what he is trying to say Hardcore is that God created us, and for that gift he asks us to have faith in him, and follow his word, and not doing so is basically saying to god, *my creation was not worth following you* and in doing so, he takes away his gift of eternal life in heaven, and replaces it with the lake of fire.

Which still doesn't seem fair to me.

[Oneironaut]

I don't think the story of the Bible is always changing. I mean, sure it leaves open the question of how God *exactly* created the universe... but that doesn't mean it changes. It just means it leaves that particular aspect of creation open for some discussion (hopefully friendly discussion... though some people get out of hand).
Of course. The Bible can never change, because faith, unlike science, is incapable of admitting it was wrong. Faith is not based in the real world of facts and evidence, so new facts and new evidence cannot change a faithful person's faith. Faith is absolute devotion to ideas that don't have any evidence for them, or that contradict the evidence, so it's rather absurd to expect faith to become more true over time as we understand the universe more completely. Theology will be forever stuck in the Dark Ages, because there is nowhere to advance, no evidence to examine, no new theories to prove or disprove by experimentation. God is a fairy tale, and it's impossible to study a mythical being.

What I'm saying is, no one can look at the Christian Scriptures and see it saying God created the earth one day and then see it saying God didn't create the earth the next. I will agree that biblical texts are not scientific proof of anything. However, they are full of religious proof when practiced. If one starts practicing the teachings of Christ he will see the types of results the Word of God promises. And those teachings do not change. They have been practiced by Christians since Christ first uttered them.
Funny thing is, I've heard Muslims say the exact same thing about Muhammed. I've heard Mormons say the exact same thing about Joseph Smith. And I've heard Scientologists say the exact same thing about L. Ron Hubbard. If you just convince yourself to believe what they believe, you will come to understand how true those beliefs are!

Is it just me, or do all religious people have some kind of inability to recognize circular logic? Believers in the paranormal and conspiracy theories, too. It's as if they aren't even trying to examine their own arguments for logical consistency.

By the way, do I really get to see all the results the Word of God promises? Because I think it would be killer to drink poison and wrestle snakes without getting hurt. And curing cancer with my hands would be pretty sweet too. All I have to do is convert to Christianity, huh?

"And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." (Mark 16:17-18)

[wayoftheleaf]

They may be checking their own arguments, but it is just like you said, the logical consistency is already set in your mind if you have faith.

[Staurm]

BTW, why did somebody give me bad rep on my first post with a comment of "good post":wtf:

Aaaaaaaaaah feck! :mad:

Dude, I'm sorry that was me, I cocked it up. It was supposed to be good rep, I didn't realise. Must have clicked the wrong option.

I'll try to contact a mod and see if I can get it rectified. :thumbsup:

Welcome to the forum...

[Staurm]

Gandalf, I asked the mods and they can't do naff all abaaht it! Sorry, I'll plus rep you 2 times as soon as the system'll let me to balance things out, cool? :thumbs up:

ribbit

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

lol, no worries staurm you didn't have to go to all that trouble (appreciated though).

[jsn9333]

I take issue with this. If i had knowledge of God, I'd certainly be inclined, to at least agree that God exists. I'd still probably take issue with his word, but that would be after my acknowledging that word is at least real, because it's been proven to me.... [content removed for the sake of brevity] Anyways, i've been watching way too much youtube, I'm off to bed, have a good night and I hope to continue with you some other time :thumbsup:



Again, I don't doubt the sincerity of your belief that you don't have knowledge of God. But nonetheless, God's point of view (according the the Scriptures) is that you have no excuse because he has made what may be known about Him plain for all to see. That doesn't mean he has appeared to everyone's physical eyes, but He claims that, spiritually, we have all seen God and have all rejected Him.

Is that physically falsifyable? No it is not. But my point is that, if true, then it justifies God's punishisment of those who continue to rebel against and reject Him as Creator.

I understand that your viewpoint is that you have not seen God spiritually and that parts of His word make no sense logically to you. And yes, I can see how that is disheartening. My point simply is that, if God is the Creator... then He is probably right and you are probably wrong. Well, I take that back. If he is the creator of the very spiritual eyes you say you haven't seen him with, and of the very logic you say is not making sense... then He is *definitely* right and you are definitely wrong. Again though... I'm not saying your viewpoint doesn't matter. I'm saying *if* God exists and His word is true, then you're opinion of His justice is not what his justice relies on to be just.

This is just my opinion, but I think one of the reasons God may not give us the "exact physical proof" we sometimes may ask for is because we would be held to a higher standard for our rejection of God given that proof. I think in the end there will be a lot of people thankful that God didn't give them the proof they asked for when they asked for it, because they now realize they would've continued rejecting Him. I know there have been times I have been so addicted to sin and had particular sins so engraved in my psyche (be it anger, lust, etc.) that even if I had proof of God I still would have hard times trying to avoid that which I knew was sin.

That is just my opinion. However, I do know this... God does have reasons for everything He does. If He does not answer someone's prayer for Him to physically show Himself to that person He does so with good reason.

You don't deserve punishment for having a sceptical mind. According the Scriptures we all deserve punishment for sinning... for spiritually rejecting God and rebelling against His ways. If your sceptical mind prevents you from spiritually re-uniting with God and accepting His ways, then that is what it does. But that sceptical mind is not what "earned" us our punishment.

Also, I wouldn't say, "there's no actual middle ground, just torment and torture for those who do not accept his word as 100%." Salvation, according to the Bible, is not had by "accepting his word as 100%." It is had by trusting Christ and believing in His sacrifice for you... which essentially restores your relationship with God. Then it is lived out in your thankful obedience to what you know of his commands. If you don't think all of his commands in the Scripture are actually his commands, then I'm not sure He would hold you accountable for that. However, I would tread carefully in rejecting particular Scripture verses... since I think He would expect you to have good reasons for rejecting any of them, and to have done due diligence in examining if your reasons were valid.

If I may ask, what rules seem "very unfair" to you? There are a lot of Christians who put unnecessary burdons on people, and perhaps that has turned you away from Christianity. For instance, many say Christians should not use cannabis... but that isn't anywhere in the Bible. In fact, many say Christians shouldn't drink... and the exact opposite of that is in the Bible (Christ made wine and even drank it according to the Scriptures). Premarital sex is another big turnoff for most people, but I'm not sure that it is wrong in all cases (especially if commitment and the goal of trying to find a fit for eventual marriage are involved, instead of treating life like it is one big orgy). I've come to these conclusions after years of studying the Bible.

To me, God's rules seem very fair and have benefited the quality of my life a great deal. I can understand how some people ("swingers", people who enjoy orgies, homosexuals, etc. come to mind) would have a very hard time with some of God's rules since those people "aren't hurting anyone else", etc. But for the majority of people, I honestly don't see what the problem is with God's rules. Maybe it is because I've been following them a long time, but to me, they seem not only fair, but I'm so grateful for them because they have bettered my life in such wonderful ways.

I do know that the least fun part of being a Christian is having to tell a homosexual or someone like that that the Bible teaches that the practice is sin (if they ask me). However, I can at least understand that what God is asking that person to do at least *seems* natural to me (whether it seems natural to them or not).

But for the most part, almost the entirety of God's commandments have been very, very helpful to me. And the peace He has given me has been so acute. With that coupled with what I see as historical evidence for the Scriptures and the Ressurection, I just can't come up with a good reason to reject His Word.

[jsn9333]

Of course. The Bible can never change, because faith, unlike science, is incapable of admitting it was wrong. [...][edited for the sake of brevity]... And curing cancer with my hands would be pretty sweet too. All I have to do is convert to Christianity, huh?


I don't agree that, "Faith is absolute devotion to ideas that don't have any evidence for them," (as you said). Faith, bibilcally, is holding a belief so strongly that you are willing to hold it central to how you live your life. And you're allowed, in fact your're *encouraged*, to gather and examine evidence to strengthen your faith. I beleive Peter, in the Scriptures, asked people to go talk to those who claimed to have seen the Christ ressurected so they could judge their story for themselves. So I have no problem examining historical evidence that supports or harms my faith. In fact, I've only been encouraged to do that by Christian teachers, and the Bible itself. And it has only strengthened my faith.

I understand you've heard people of other faiths say the equivilent of, "If one starts practicing the teachings of [enter religion here] he will see the types of results it promises." That's why I would hold that experience I have had personally as the sole evidence for my faith... because that alone is not very strong evidence. I would just say that has encouraged my continued examination of Christianity, since that is one area in which it has held as true in my personal experience.

So my logic is not "circular" as you imply. I think it is wise, not "circular", for someone to examine if a particular set of religious principles have held true in the faith he practices. There are true principles that are a part of almost all religions. That is why I say that examining those principles should not be the sole basis for someone's faith. In my experience though, Christianity has the most truth, and Christ is in fact the way and the truth.

The signs you quoted Christ as refering to in the 1st century (healing the sick, et. al.) are signs he told his disciples they would see as they preached the gospel. And they are recorded in various Scriptures and pieces of history as having occured in the disciples view.

You seem to expect that you will also view those signs. I'm not sure that is going to be the case. He did not say that each and every sign would be practiced by each and every believer throughout time.

This is just my opinion, but I think one of the reasons God may not give us the "exact physical proof" we sometimes may ask for is because we would be held to a higher standard for our rejection of God given that proof. I think in the end there will be a lot of people thankful that God didn't give them the proof they asked for when they asked for it, because they now realize they would've continued rejecting Him. I know there have been times I have been so addicted to sin and had particular sins so engraved in my psyche (be it anger, lust, etc.) that even if I had proof of God I still would have hard times trying to avoid that which I knew was sin.

That is just my opinion. However, I do know this... God does have reasons for everything He does. If He does not answer someone's prayer for Him to physically show Himself to that person He does so with good reason.

[jsn9333]

Hardcore Newbie and Oneironaut, I have enjoyed talking to you guyes thoroughly, however I'm going to bow out of this discussion at this point (and the Westboro thread, Oneironaut). I have been putting off studying for a bar exam by hanging out, reading, and posting on this board in addition to some other things.

I'm going to basically give up internet and TV for a month to prepare for the bar exam. So I probably won't be back in this forum for a while. Thanks for the discussion and God bless.

[Hardcore Newbie]

Hardcore Newbie and Oneironaut, I have enjoyed talking to you guyes thoroughly, however I'm going to bow out of this discussion at this point (and the Westboro thread, Oneironaut). I have been putting off studying for a bar exam by hanging out, reading, and posting on this board in addition to some other things.

I'm going to basically give up internet and TV for a month to prepare for the bar exam. So I probably won't be back in this forum for a while. Thanks for the discussion and God bless.Procrastinator ;) Good luck.

[Hardcore Newbie]

Again, I don't doubt the sincerity of your belief that you don't have knowledge of God. But nonetheless, God's point of view (according the the Scriptures) is that you have no excuse because he has made what may be known about Him plain for all to see. That doesn't mean he has appeared to everyone's physical eyes, but He claims that, spiritually, we have all seen God and have all rejected Him.

Is that physically falsifyable? No it is not. But my point is that, if true, then it justifies God's punishisment of those who continue to rebel against and reject Him as Creator.

I understand that your viewpoint is that you have not seen God spiritually and that parts of His word make no sense logically to you. And yes, I can see how that is disheartening. My point simply is that, if God is the Creator... then He is probably right and you are probably wrong. Well, I take that back. If he is the creator of the very spiritual eyes you say you haven't seen him with, and of the very logic you say is not making sense... then He is *definitely* right and you are definitely wrong. Again though... I'm not saying your viewpoint doesn't matter. I'm saying *if* God exists and His word is true, then you're opinion of His justice is not what his justice relies on to be just.

This is just my opinion, but I think one of the reasons God may not give us the "exact physical proof" we sometimes may ask for is because we would be held to a higher standard for our rejection of God given that proof. I think in the end there will be a lot of people thankful that God didn't give them the proof they asked for when they asked for it, because they now realize they would've continued rejecting Him. I know there have been times I have been so addicted to sin and had particular sins so engraved in my psyche (be it anger, lust, etc.) that even if I had proof of God I still would have hard times trying to avoid that which I knew was sin.

That is just my opinion. However, I do know this... God does have reasons for everything He does. If He does not answer someone's prayer for Him to physically show Himself to that person He does so with good reason.

You don't deserve punishment for having a sceptical mind. According the Scriptures we all deserve punishment for sinning... for spiritually rejecting God and rebelling against His ways. If your sceptical mind prevents you from spiritually re-uniting with God and accepting His ways, then that is what it does. But that sceptical mind is not what "earned" us our punishment.

Also, I wouldn't say, "there's no actual middle ground, just torment and torture for those who do not accept his word as 100%." Salvation, according to the Bible, is not had by "accepting his word as 100%." It is had by trusting Christ and believing in His sacrifice for you... which essentially restores your relationship with God. Then it is lived out in your thankful obedience to what you know of his commands. If you don't think all of his commands in the Scripture are actually his commands, then I'm not sure He would hold you accountable for that. However, I would tread carefully in rejecting particular Scripture verses... since I think He would expect you to have good reasons for rejecting any of them, and to have done due diligence in examining if your reasons were valid.

If I may ask, what rules seem "very unfair" to you? There are a lot of Christians who put unnecessary burdons on people, and perhaps that has turned you away from Christianity. For instance, many say Christians should not use cannabis... but that isn't anywhere in the Bible. In fact, many say Christians shouldn't drink... and the exact opposite of that is in the Bible (Christ made wine and even drank it according to the Scriptures). Premarital sex is another big turnoff for most people, but I'm not sure that it is wrong in all cases (especially if commitment and the goal of trying to find a fit for eventual marriage are involved, instead of treating life like it is one big orgy). I've come to these conclusions after years of studying the Bible.

To me, God's rules seem very fair and have benefited the quality of my life a great deal. I can understand how some people ("swingers", people who enjoy orgies, homosexuals, etc. come to mind) would have a very hard time with some of God's rules since those people "aren't hurting anyone else", etc. But for the majority of people, I honestly don't see what the problem is with God's rules. Maybe it is because I've been following them a long time, but to me, they seem not only fair, but I'm so grateful for them because they have bettered my life in such wonderful ways.

I do know that the least fun part of being a Christian is having to tell a homosexual or someone like that that the Bible teaches that the practice is sin (if they ask me). However, I can at least understand that what God is asking that person to do at least *seems* natural to me (whether it seems natural to them or not).

But for the most part, almost the entirety of God's commandments have been very, very helpful to me. And the peace He has given me has been so acute. With that coupled with what I see as historical evidence for the Scriptures and the Ressurection, I just can't come up with a good reason to reject His Word.
I won't say too much since you're not going to be around to discuss it, but I'll just say this.

I'm not gay, I'm not a swinger, I'm not a drinker, but I question the very nature of such things being sin. I'm not someone who will hold dear a system that benefits myself, when I disagree with the rules of that system.

The reason I don't hold the Bible or it's words to be "true" is the basic fact that I believe I am a decent person who loves nearly everyone, yet I find myself disagreeing with the very nature of many sins.

I can't see these words being true, because they are so out of tune with my concept of love.

Again have a good one :)

[Perp]

Well, if you believe that then you must accept the fact of the holographic universe, and that all matter is just different wave manifestations in one connected energy field. ESP, mind over matter, walking through walls, would all be theoretically possible, once we learn how to manipulate this field.

[GraziLovesMary]

Umm, it's common sense. You can't just change the world with your thoughts. If you want to prove me wrong, cure cancer with your thoughts, or make a ham sandwich with your thoughts. Do anything with just your thoughts and I will be convinced. Do you have any scientific research proving I can't shoot laser beams out of my eyes if I stare at the Moon for eight hours straight? No, but that doesn't mean you should take me seriously if I make an outrageous claim like that. You should ask me to prove it before you take it seriously.

Common sense is a relativistic anomaly. The only reason its common sense that you cant have a tangible effect upon the world using only thought, is because so many people share the same close-minded ignorance towards the world. If you think you cant do something, you wont be able to do it.

Can you prove to me that I can NOT change the world with my thoughts? I would like to see how you accomplished that.

Also... I want to publicly laugh at any of the people who make outrageous statements and then post the Wikipedia link backing their statements. Wikipedia is a nice site with some great information. However... it is not a professional reference. Anybody can change anything on that site... thats why its called "The online encyclopedia that anybody can edit." Sounds like a recipe for a solidly backed statement to me.......

[GraziLovesMary]

Hawkings is over rated. Just because he defied illness and disabilty with such commendable adroitness doesn't make the man a genius. Fritjof Capra has some far more progressive and interesting ideas, I reccommend any of his books, especially The Web of Life.

You are right. His genius has nothing to do with the fact that he is battling Lou Gehrigs disease. It has to do with all the breakthrough work he has done in the fields of theoretical and astro-physics. Just because other people have some interesting ideas, doesnt mean that Hawking is discredited as a result.

[GraziLovesMary]

*WHEW* So I have an overwhelming amount to say about this topic lol, but Im gonna try to slim it down...

As a Nuclear Physics major, I am interested in any and every theory, perspective, model, supposition, idea that can be posed. I was once enamored by superstring theory and m-theory, until I began doing more in-depth research. The greatest thing about all these is that they arent even theories... A theory must have some way for a scientist to prove or disprove it. They are merely scientific models by which many people are attempting to devise a unified theory. It is more and more becoming a joke in the scientific community because so many people are trying to figure out the mathematical logistics of it, and then trying to equate it with a physical model. Then they wonder why they have not been able to match them up for the past 60 or so years. Wikipedia's articles are informative, and for the most part, they are not exactly incorrect. HOWEVER, do not expect to read articles from an online encyclopedia that anybody can edit about highly advanced theoretical physics and expect to be well-informed and knowledgeable about the subject.

All matter is comprised of energy. Energy that has been condensed and specialized to achieve whatever properties it has. Energy can not be created nor destroyed, so when we die, that surplus of residual energy is still there. Prove to me that this energy does not remain clustered together and retain its thought-energy properties. I do not even want to go into detail on this because I will go on forever.


I love martial arts as well. I have been obsessed with martial arts techniques and philosophies since I was 4, and have studied many different ones. Shaolin Kung Fu is one of my all time favorites, and I would love to train in the temple. My Sifu worked with some pretty amazing people. Tai Chi is great for balance, strength and controlling your internal energy. Wing Chun Kung Fu is another favorite of mine, and I would love to train under a Sifu as I have only been able to study it on my own. I love Muay Thai, its alot of fun, and its almost as brutal as Wing Chun. As far as Dim Mak is concerned, that is another art that I am studying right now. I have a book written by an osteopathic physician explaining all the concepts of Dim Mak, and then showing how they are truly connected via his knowledge of osteopathic medicine. Dim Mak is no joke... its very dangerous and real. The reason why the orient has remained so relatively unchained for so many thousands of years is because their way of life, their philosophies, even their languages are all interconnected, and give them a deeper, richer perspective of the world.

The one Earthly religion I believe comes closest to the truth? In fact, eerily close.. Zen Buddhism.

[Staurm]

Isn't the scientific term for an unproven theory, a theorem?

I too am jumping in in the middle of this, I have not the time to read it all, well I do but I'd probably end up spending even more time replying to everything, and that is what I've not got the time for really.

What bothers me about the Grand Unified Theory, apart from the fact I was inspired to take the wrong career path in my university days, led by its false promise, is that it distracts attention from more exciting prospects hidden in rather more new age sciences based on chaos theory. I think its good that they are pushing these theories to the edge, even though its becoming quite apparent that there is probably not going to be a Grand Unified Theory, it is still fun to explore the madness of science, its what make science interesting.

Zen buddhism and models of life and conciousness based around chaos theory do offer some insight into why this is the case, and it seems that in order to understand this about science you have to study it to the point where you start to know less than you previously knew. But you don't have to be a hot shot scientist, you just have to know a bit about the basics.

I think this is where science is going wrong, we are using this knowledge to destructive ends, where we should all be sitting around going wow we are really never going to work all this out, and I don't want to ever work it out. It's this perpetual state of confusion that makes it all so worth thinking about. I feel as though I have pretty much underpinned what the fuck its all about, but at the same time I have had to come to terms with the fact that I will really never know, and all I have is the feeling that I am surfing the waves of light that make up the universe, and that they will keep coming and offering new insights.

[Staurm]

Hawkings is over rated. Just because he defied illness and disabilty with such commendable adroitness doesn't make the man a genius. Fritjof Capra has some far more progressive and interesting ideas, I reccommend any of his books, especially The Web of Life.


You are right. His genius has nothing to do with the fact that he is battling Lou Gehrigs disease. It has to do with all the breakthrough work he has done in the fields of theoretical and astro-physics. Just because other people have some interesting ideas, doesnt mean that Hawking is discredited as a result.

It's not what I am saying. Hawking plagiarised his students work in his early days. He has discovered nothing that I would describe in any way as epoch making by scientific standards. I am saying the man is not a genius, he is just really clever, and that there are other less emminent scientists in the world, a lot actually, who offer more progressive ideas.

I am not saying he doesn't have my full respect, I think he is a remarkable person. it's just that I have far greater respect and admiration for other scientist and their views. I don't think the human race will ever colonise space to the extent he seems to project in his literature. Perhaps though we all colonise the universe on a spiritual level, though, and we are about to realise this. Maybe that is what he really means.

Quoted from the previous pagina.


Isn't the scientific term for an unproven theory, a theorem?

I too am jumping in in the middle of this, I have not the time to read it all, well I do but I'd probably end up spending even more time replying to everything, and that is what I've not got the time for really.

What bothers me about the Grand Unified Theory, apart from the fact I was inspired to take the wrong career path in my university days, led by its false promise, is that it distracts attention from more exciting prospects hidden in rather more new age sciences based on chaos theory. I think its good that they are pushing these theories to the edge, even though its becoming quite apparent that there is probably not going to be a Grand Unified Theory, it is still fun to explore the madness of science, its what make science interesting.

Zen buddhism and models of life and conciousness based around chaos theory do offer some insight into why this is the case, and it seems that in order to understand this about science you have to study it to the point where you start to know less than you previously knew. But you don't have to be a hot shot scientist, you just have to know a bit about the basics.

I think this is where science is going wrong, we are using this knowledge to destructive ends, where we should all be sitting around going wow we are really never going to work all this out, and I don't want to ever work it out. It's this perpetual state of confusion that makes it all so worth thinking about. I feel as though I have pretty much underpinned what the fuck its all about, but at the same time I have had to come to terms with the fact that I will really never know, and all I have is the feeling that I am surfing the waves of light that make up the universe, and that they will keep coming and offering new insights.

[GraziLovesMary]

It's not what I am saying. Hawking plagiarised his students work in his early days. He has discovered nothing that I would describe in any way as epoch making by scientific standards. I am saying the man is not a genius, he is just really clever, and that there are other less emminent scientists in the world, a lot actually, who offer more progressive ideas.

I am not saying he doesn't have my full respect, I think he is a remarkable person. it's just that I have far greater respect and admiration for other scientist and their views. I don't think the human race will ever colonise space to the extent he seems to project in his literature. Perhaps though we all colonise the universe on a spiritual level, though, and we are about to realise this. Maybe that is what he really means.



Well I can respect that, and it would seem to me like you have many of the same thought patterns that I seem to have. Whether or not we will end up colonizing the planet as much as some people seem to think we will, I think we should still aspire towards such as that. If not, I can see us losing inspiration and imagination, and that could prove fatal for our species. This planet is fragile, and if we dont start looking towards space as an entire race, and soon, we could end up getting caught in a disaster of apocalyptic proportions with too many of us eggs in basket Earth.



Isn't the scientific term for an unproven theory, a theorem?

I too am jumping in in the middle of this, I have not the time to read it all, well I do but I'd probably end up spending even more time replying to everything, and that is what I've not got the time for really.

What bothers me about the Grand Unified Theory, apart from the fact I was inspired to take the wrong career path in my university days, led by its false promise, is that it distracts attention from more exciting prospects hidden in rather more new age sciences based on chaos theory. I think its good that they are pushing these theories to the edge, even though its becoming quite apparent that there is probably not going to be a Grand Unified Theory, it is still fun to explore the madness of science, its what make science interesting.

Zen buddhism and models of life and conciousness based around chaos theory do offer some insight into why this is the case, and it seems that in order to understand this about science you have to study it to the point where you start to know less than you previously knew. But you don't have to be a hot shot scientist, you just have to know a bit about the basics.

I think this is where science is going wrong, we are using this knowledge to destructive ends, where we should all be sitting around going wow we are really never going to work all this out, and I don't want to ever work it out. It's this perpetual state of confusion that makes it all so worth thinking about. I feel as though I have pretty much underpinned what the fuck its all about, but at the same time I have had to come to terms with the fact that I will really never know, and all I have is the feeling that I am surfing the waves of light that make up the universe, and that they will keep coming and offering new insights.

I like this, it echoes many things I have pondered about, and I agree that Zen Buddhism is not to be taken lightly. The last paragraph could have been ripped directly out of my internal monologue.

[Staurm]

LMAO @ internal monologue :)


This planet is fragile, and if we dont start looking towards space as an entire race, and soon, we could end up getting caught in a disaster of apocalyptic proportions with too many of us eggs in basket Earth.

Well if you think this planet is fragile, what's it going to be like in space?

I am more inclinced to hold the views of Fritjof Capra with more credibility. I think its important that we concentrate our efforts into sustainable technology on the planet rather than space. There are plenty of exciting new branches of knowledge emerging that are not being given credit by the institutes, largely I think because they are non-profitable. In many respect they give back the power to the people to harness their own energy from a free and seemingly inexhaustable source, the sun.

Whilst it may be possible to colonise the stars, as romanticised by Hawking and Clarke et al, I think this is a long way off and too far into the future to even consider as a possiblity that might save us from an apocalypse. At best it would only save a handful of the rich elite and powerful, I don't think there would be room for a bunch of pot heads like us.

If we can't settle our difference on planet earth, how the hell are we going to settle them in space where there are far less resources to go round.

We are a strong race, and our planet is more than sufficient for us, we just need to ger rid of the capitalists and the war hawks. If we can do that then I am more than happy to accept that I'll never go to the stars in my current mould, to sit round an open fire and just stare at them is enough of a wonder for me, but who knows what the distant future holds for any of us...

[GraziLovesMary]

Staurm I see your points and I can appreciate your sentiment, however the only way I differ from your viewpoint is by how much energy we should be spending on the space program.

You are absolutely 100% correct... if we cant figure out what the fuck we are doing here, then we will not be able to function as a society in space. HOWEVER.. that does not stand true for everybody, simply the pathetic mass-majority. The people who enroll in, and spend their entire lives in the space program are very serious about it, and sometimes forget all about the shit that goes on here, they are so focussed. I guess my point is, we cant really decide which one is more important, I think we should continue developing each one equally: Our space program, and our ability to interact with our own species as a whole without all the embarrassing ignorance and violence.

When I say this planet is a fragile ecology, Im talking about all the many ways this planet as we know it could be destroyed. Our number one enemy is ourselves... global warming and nuclear war are the biggest threats to this planet and our lives on it, so we definitely need to start from there. However thats not where it ends. Any number of asteroids and meteoroids have the ability to take us off guard and fuck our world up, and whose to say when Yellowstone will go off?? That could happen in 10,000 years, but more likely its gonna happen on this side of a hundred. And what then? I just think we need to slowly begin stretchin our fingers outwards as well. It serves more than just one purpose.

By keeping with the goals we have set, we are starting to form a consciousness with the mindset to suck it up and stray from these natural human tendencies towards chaos and entropy.. to instead work together with a common drive and the goal of betterment and preservation of self AND species. We are also forming the beginnings or the core group of people who are serious and passionate enough about going into space that it is feasible to believe they would not succumb to the self-destructive fallacies of our species. By doing more than just dipping our toes in this endless pool of black, this final frontier, we can still have the manpower, time and resources to spend on keeping shit from falling apart here on Earth, while more and more people get inspired by the stars.


Do you want to know why I think our species is so ignorant even after all weve learned? Because for most people, reality to them ends with the atmosphere. We are still thinking of ourselves in terms of Americans, Chinese, Russians, Canadians, etc... each country thinks they are the baddest ass humans, and were the baddest ass race, and we fuckin dominate this and that and BLAHFUCKINGBLAH. We need to stop thinking we are so fucking significant... we arent. And we need to stop thinking of ourselves in terms of temporary lines drawn on an insignificant planet. We need to start thinking of ourselves as EARTHLINGS. We are all Homo Sapiens.. we are the same race of people with the same possible destinies, and we should be working together; instead of fighting over fucking fossil fuels, we should be collaborating on how to more effectively utilize hydrogen and all the MANY other energy sources.

I dont think we will come together as a species like that until first contact is finally made on a global scale. When our planet as a whole finally realizes we arent alone, maybe then we will begin to coallesce into something fantastic. Until then all we can do is keep reaching a finger or two towards the stars while trying to continue balancing shit out here on Earth. But I firmly believe we do need to maintain some sort of balance or we could end up getting locked into some amazingly stupid shit. Like for instance, a two-term presidential war with a personal agenda.

[Staurm]

Most of the people who enroll in these space programs are in it for the money and the career. I once had a job in space, 30 quid an hour they were paying me. I walked out after three days because it bored the shit out of me, and I couldn't be arsed wearing all the clean suit gear. I decided to go to India instead. The job I had to do was making me lethargic and depressed, and the immediately senior management/ex army boys were annoying me too much.

Your right about some peoples concept of space though, I had to laugh recently when someone I was working with on a normal banjo man job asked me what shooting stars were. It's debris from space entering the atmosphere and burning up, you know rocks and stuff. His reply to that was "But how do they get up there?" To be fair though, it was 4 in the morning and we were all blazed on the job. Furthermore he didn't have a university degree in physics, and therefore effectively had the astronomical mind of a 6 year old.

I don't mind all this sending probes to Mars, and I hope to see the human race go to the moon again within my lifetime, or even Mars who knows. It just annoys the crap out of me that there's money for that, there's money for war, but there is no money for me to start some new sustainable non-starship enterprise. There's no money for me to buy a plot of land back from the empire and grow vegetables in my garden, whilst spending the rest of my days getting phased and studying fractal patterns.