Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I like it better than the last one

It's good, but I don't see the need with the discussion thread

It's not going to go anywhere good, just lock it now.

[Frumple]

No, no, that's the name.

[smjjames]

No, no, that's the name.

Moroni, Moron, lol! XD

[Arx]

smj, this really isn't the place for making offensive comments about people's religions, even if you think it's just in fun - people have different standards. I have an interest in this thread remaining unlocked.

[smeeprocket]

Yea, I realize I am guilt of (usually unintentionally) causing threads to crash and burn, or at least get things deleted, but this is a good thread. I haven't been posting as much, though I still have questions. But just getting answers from people of various faiths is really enlightening.

I feel like I am learning a lot.

I have a lot of anti-christian sentiment because of the problems it has caused in my life through govt and personal experience, but I also realize that not everyone religious is malicious. Understanding individuals' takes on their faith helps humanize it for me, personally.

[Bohandas]

No, no, that's the name.

Moroni, Moron, lol! XD

You're conflating Joseph Smith's sources with Douglas St. Clair Smith's sources. Properly the first should go only with the first and the second only with the second.

[Grek]

@Reelya: If we're recommending books, how about some fan fiction?  I don't actually think the world works like that, but there is a certain elegance to Occum's razor being due to simulating all computable universes in order and it would tickle me to no end to discover that Kolmogorov complexity is the result of an analogous mechanism.

@Arx: That's a fair analogy for Biocosm, I suppose. I personally think the that the fine tuning problem is best answered with the weak anthropic principle: "I think, therefore the laws of physics allow for thought." I also think that it is important to assume that there's only one universe and that if we screw it up, that's it. Even if it isn't true, working under the assumption makes for a more appropriate level of caution than assuming that a nebulous future AI will reach through time to set right all past and future mistakes.

[Reelya]

If there's only one universe it won't matter whether we screw it up or not once it ends.

[Helgoland]

but I also realize that not everyone religious is malicious. Understanding individuals' takes on their faith helps humanize it for me, personally.

That's always a good thing - the Russia/Ukraine threads helped me very much in a similar way.

Also PTW.

[Urist Mc Dwarf]

All Christians:

Someone mentioned back in the old thread just before it got locked that according to christians animals don't have a soul.

It interested me so i made a very short google search titled: "Do animals have a soul" and found that in the book of Ecclesiastes it says this:
"For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity".

What i find even more interesting, is not only that it mentions that animals also have soul/spirit, but that humans and animals actually share the same one spirit.

For some reason everyone always seems to ignore Ecclesiastes.

There might be a reason for that. i know the Jewish reason, but are there any others?

[Helgoland]

A possible Catholic reason: The Church decided what should go in the bible back in the day, so the Church has the authority to interpret it - and, indeed, to 'comment out' the bits that aren't up to scratch.

[Orange Wizard]

The reasoning is that humans are "made in the image of God", whereas animals and angels/demons are not.

...

Also, people tend to ignore Ecclesiastes because it reads like the diary of an angsty teen.

[TD1]

If humans are made in the image of God, and Evolution seems to suggest all animals have the same background (including us,) how are these two things compatible? It seems to me you'd have to discard one view or the other.

[Orange Wizard]

Well, yeah. If we were being rational, that is.

[Helgoland]

If humans are made in the image of God, and Evolution seems to suggest all animals have the same background (including us,) how are these two things compatible? It seems to me you'd have to discard one view or the other.

Evolution as the process in which man is made?

[TD1]

Evolution as the process in which all living beings were developed, back to the point of origin. There is no special treatment observed. If there is no special treatment, not only do we seem nothing more than just another animal (in which case claiming stewardship over animals is just ridiculous,) but claiming that we, specifically, were made in God's image when every animal has an interconnecting ancestory is also rather unlikely.

Well, yeah. If we were being rational, that is.

Faith where you are claiming something unfalsifiable is true is at least possible (no matter how small the possibility) and therefore partly understandable, but claiming something is true when rationality states otherwise strays into the realm of madness.