Existence of God

[Slythis]

Originally posted by Phobos@Jun 17 2004, 10:31 PM
Certainly the Bible is... antiquated at best, though it still serves as a good moral guideline in many respects and still contains messages that contain some relevance to today. Christianity is a faith, it isn't a book, though undoubtedly many Christians (and agnostics/athiests who are actively trying to promote their own sense of the divine, or lack thereof) would argue otherwise.

*cheers* Thats what I've been saying this entire time. There are outdated things in this world that a sadly large portion of people live their lives by, racial superiority, sexism, your vote actually meaning something(j/k), people who think scientists on the cutting edge are all atheists and sctrict interpritation of ancient scripts are just a few. These things produce laughter at best and "strange fruit" at their worst.

Oh and for those who find it a little too convieniant that God is placed beyond the laws of science. assuming there is a God then he invented science, correct? And humans have created video games, correct? The creation of the universe would follow the same basic guidlines as creating a video game, set out the basics of it and work your way up to the finished product (evolution). Now following your lines of logic if God is bound to the laws of sciene, we should be bound to the laws of video games (or lack there of) in the real world. So if you are correct the instant the first 2-D video game was created the universe as we know it should have become 2-D as well, but thats just how I see it.

Oh and the Story of the great flood is found in every culture world wide, so it's more than likly that some guy at some point knew that some bad stuff was going down, so he built a boat, gathered up some live stock, and laughed while everyone else drowned.

[Shigawire]

so he built a boat, gathered up some live stock, and laughed while everyone else drowned.

*lol*

You are funny slythis.

[LegionnaireX]

Oh... but i thought you said the bible couldn't be proved wrong?

Siblesz,I never said that the bible can't be proved wrong, and I didn't prove it wrong just now. All I did was interpretet a few things differently. AND IT MAKE A HELL OF A LOT MORE SENSE. What is wrong with reinterpreting, people spoke different back when those books were written, therefore you can't take everything as there literall meaning today. Did you even READ my last post, or just past it by because you though it was "full of crap". WELL READ IT, IT MAKES SENSE. But if you just refuse to be open to new ideas, well thats another story.

Deyeomeedeez, I want you to find somewhere that it says that the flood didn't happen. Science has actually PROVED that there was a large flood.

For you atheist here, science isn't as "all powerful" as you think it is. Science can make mistakes just as uneducated people writing books in another language can. You have no proof that even suggests that there isn't a god. If the bible is full of holes, guess what, so is history and science. How did the people of Britain built stonehenge so early in mans history, how did the great sphinx get eroded by water when it was in the middle of the freakin desert. Those are just some of the flaws that our in your stories. Look at your mistakes too, don't just look at mine.

[Deyeomeedeez]

I never said there wasn't a flood. What I meant was that someday, if science proves that there wasn't a flood, they will just reinterpret the bible to fit with the discoveries.

[LegionnaireX]

Well, if science proves that there wasn't a flood. Than I don't see how people can reinterpret the bible to say that there was. It wouldn't make sense to say that there wasn't a flood but there was a flood.

[Peachy Carnehan]

I don't think they'll re-interpret it, because you can never know for sure if a flood happened or not.

I think the main problem when studying the Bible is how old it is, and how difficult it is to prove one way or another because of it.

[Portuguese Rebel]

I don't think they'll re-interpret it, because you can never know for sure if a flood happened or not.

This is nonsense. A worldwide flood of the dimension described in the bible would leave a clear continuous geological strata everywhere. And, dispite being searched for countiously for centuries, not such evidence it present in the geological record. A great flood could only be a localized event. More still, there isn't enough water in the planet to do what is described in the bible, not even if every last drop of water was in the liquid state (wich is another physical impossibility in this planet).

[morble]

Re: the Noahic flood. There are enough accounts all over the world to suggest something happened. It's possible that at some time in pre-history each geographical region separately experienced a flood, and that become part of their oral tradition. (This is the more popular theory today.) That does not rule out, however, the possibility that the flooding was simultaneous all over the world.

Simultaneous world-wide flooding with tsunamis and hurricanes are a predicted outcome of global warming today. If we were pre-writing civs today, and since most of our cities (in history and now) are gathered near ocean or river shores, our world-wide oral tradition of history might well record these events as a simultaneous global catastrophic flood.

Just because evidence of a global flood in line with the account in Genesis has not been proven today is not sufficient cause to rule such an occurrence out. People forget that, until a few decades ago, continental drift was considered rank heresy in scientific circles. Now it is considered proven as fact. That the dinosaurs died out due to a huge meteor strike was considered an foolish fantasy, until a few "fools" started using state of the art analytical chemistry to measure the global deposition layer of iridium in the 1970's. Now it is considered the most likely theory, and the theory most amply supported by the facts.


Re: existence of God
No one can deny that God exists as at least a meme (a set of memes, more accurately), and that belief in some form of God has provided comfort and succor to billions of humans throughout the ages, and that God has moved humans to build huge organizations to support and increase the power of God.

Those people, atheists and theists alike, who seek to categorize God as a human form, e.g. an old guy with a beard and white robes, would seem to be missing the point. (OTOH, this meme of God as an actual human who eats, breathes, and *****, was St. Paul's organizational stroke of genius, and resulted directly in the creation of Christianity as we know it today--so it is an active and powerful meme, if not the actual Reality. And I don't have enough proof to say which of these--mere meme, or physcial Reality--is the accurate version.)

But I think that saying God created Man in His Image is referring to consciousness, not how many legs or tails we have. Animals can reason and use judgment, and can scale their responses appropriately to stimuli. Animals can use tools, have wars, create social groups of interaction; some species, like termites or ants, could even be said to create some form of great cities or civilizations. Animals are aware of themselves as beings and can recognize themselves and others like themselves, e.g. in a mirror or water reflection. But humans are the only lifeforms that we know of who are aware that they think--that they have thoughts. I've toyed with this concept for a few years, and have come to the personal conclusion that this extra layer of self-awareness is the sole defining characteristic that separates humans from all other known lifeforms.

It seems to me that humans have inexorably progressed towards the Song of Solomon as an ultimate definition of the relationship between humans and God, and that we, as a civilization, are approaching a religious revelation of God as Beloved, Lover, and near-equal. God was first a variety of inchoate, often malevolent, monstrous forces, then became codified in the "monster" forms of the Egyptians, then became codified as superhumans with identifiably human characteristics by the Greeks and Romans, then was unified into a single Entity, humanistic but supremely powerful--as powerful and uncontrollable as a father figure seems to a toddler--by Abraham, then was revealed as a loving family member, a greatly powerful entity who yet allows an intimate and continuing personal relationship with the believer, by Jesus. The Song of Solomon is the logical next step in the revelation of the human/God relationship.

Those who want proof or unquestioned belief, whether atheist or theist, in an old man walking around in a white robe would seem bound to be disappointed, and appear to be searching for some small stagnant backwater to float their boat--while missing the mightiest river of all flowing right past their feet. There is no reason to suppose that the Greeks were right and God really is Zeus and his minions after all, and in fact, this is antihistorical in regards to the growth and development of the God meme(s).

Are memes real? Well, as thought constructs, they have to be metaphysical--referring back to some of my previous posts. But I don't think anyone can deny their effects and actions on physical reality, including human existence in physical reality. Memes allow a new concept to be comprehended, and are as illogical a concept as the birth of a new living being out of ingested dead matter.

Is God a meme? That is to say, does God only exist as a set of memes? There isn't enough evidence either way. There may be a single overarching intelligence out "there" that created the Universe as we comprehend it, or there might not be. What cannot be denied is that God is at least a set of memes that alters and affects human behavior, human development, and human acts and existence. If this doesn't fit what atheists demand of God, it still does not negate the effects on human reality.

[LegionnaireX]

2 points for u Portegese Rebel,

Even though people have been searching for evidence of a catastrophic flood for centuries, the technology to actually discover the truth didn't exist until the 19th and 20th centuries. One scientist and archeologist actually did find evidence that there may have been a large flood around 6000 BC.

But they were looking for evidence of a flood around 6000 B.C
But if what I proposed about the history of man is true, than a flood would have happened much earlier than 6000 BC, maybe it happened in 30,000 BC. And no one has looked for evidence of a flood in that time frame before, therefore no one has proved one way or the other that there was a flood in that time frame.

Still, if there was a flood, I don't beleive that is covered the whole of the world. Probably only covered the populated parts of the world.

[Slythis]

Originally posted by Shigawire@Jun 18 2004, 05:47 AM

so he built a boat, gathered up some live stock, and laughed while everyone else drowned.

*lol*

You are funny slythis.

I just call them like I see them

[GodEmperor Nicholas]

On the flood--I have heard that it could have been a result of the last Ice age. Because primitive people tend to live on the coasts for fishing and water, (also since moving by water can be quite fast) they all were hit hard. This sounds contradictory because Ice Age make the waters receed, but some people think that there was enough time for the ancients to relocate and found cities along the coast, and with the end of the iceage, the waters returned and wiped most out.

Biggest problem was that the Ice age was quite some time ago, and people were really hardly settled in cities or even settlements at the time. Still, that would be solid evidence that all around the world was hit at the same time.

NM

[Portuguese Rebel]

Just because evidence of a global flood in line with the account in Genesis has not been proven today is not sufficient cause to rule such an occurrence out.

Given the amount of geologic data acumulated today, with core samples ranging from the cambric to today taken in all continents in wich time on earth is this Global flood possible?

It is true that in every place there was a flood at some point in history. The thing is that from this a global flood can never be concluded. Like is said, there isn't just enough water on the planet to do it.

Simultaneous world-wide flooding with tsunamis and hurricanes are a predicted outcome of global warming today.

Of course, but storms and episodic disasters do not amount to the biblical version. If there was an episode of unusual metereologic activity (even worldwide) the effects would never be similar to noah's story. The story is either a complete metaphore (unlikely...) or it is highly exagerated to prove a moral point (high probablility...).

People forget that, until a few decades ago, continental drift was considered rank heresy in scientific circles.

Yes! But you can hardly compare the two. After decades of intense study of core samples the flood simply isn't there. And to increase the problem, it had to happen in a timeframe compatible with the keeping of such religious tradition.

Just because evidence of a global flood in line with the account in Genesis has not been proven today is not sufficient cause to rule such an occurrence out. People forget that, until a few decades ago, continental drift was considered rank heresy in scientific circles. Now it is considered proven as fact. That the dinosaurs died out due to a huge meteor strike was considered an foolish fantasy, until a few "fools" started using state of the art analytical chemistry to measure the global deposition layer of iridium in the 1970's. Now it is considered the most likely theory, and the theory most amply supported by the facts.

There is a difference here. Continental drift and extintion by meteor colision were new and strange ideas that, when they came up, had no proof to support them. Then there those hypothesys were tested and they passed with flying colours. The great flood on the other hand was first assumed to be true, then a huge amount of data was gathered (like i said before, we now have core samples and paleostratigrafic maps of the entire planet) and the flood simply wasn't there. Were is the necessary sediments going to be found now? Not on this planet.

Are memes real?

Of course they are... Real for the people infected by it. B)

This sounds contradictory because Ice Age make the waters receed, but some people think that there was enough time for the ancients to relocate and found cities along the coast, and with the end of the iceage, the waters returned and wiped most out.

No way. Regressions and trangressions of water level are way to slow to drown people. It can take centuries...

[LegionnaireX]

Of course, but storms and episodic disasters do not amount to the biblical version. If there was an episode of unusual metereologic activity (even worldwide) the effects would never be similar to noah's story. The story is either a complete metaphore (unlikely...) or it is highly exagerated to prove a moral point (high probablility...).

Yes, according to the biblical story it start with rain, but later on it talks about fierce winds and storms etc.

[Shigawire]

A very good post morble.

[DavidtheDuke]

"What great irony and sadness that man works best together arguing about the irrelevency of yesterday and prophecies of tommorow, yet works least together in writing their own future."

[morble]

Originally posted by Portuguese Rebel@Jun 18 2004, 04:01 PM
Given the amount of geologic data acumulated today, with core samples ranging from the cambric to today taken in all continents in wich time on earth is this Global flood possible?

It is true that in every place there was a flood at some point in history. The thing is that from this a global flood can never be concluded. Like is said, there isn't just enough water on the planet to do it.

Are memes real?

Of course they are... Real for the people infected by it. B)

re: the Flood. Since we're talking about oral histories, it is not really necessary that all the known catastrophic Floods happened at the same time. If your little tribe has an oral history of a Flood that happened to your ancestors and has been passed down through the ages, and then you hear another account of a Flood that happened to some other little tribe, you are naturally going to associate the two histories together. In fact, you would naturally interpret the new story as confirmation of the truth of your own historical tale. In oral histories, two stories that happened "long, long ago" basically means "at the same time" to the listener.

There's a very cool story in last month's Fantasy & Science Fiction magazine (the American fiction issue) that posits an EMP disaster that wipes out all electronic records. The story then assumes archeologists 400 years later have put together the story of American history from oral traditions and scraps of unearthed artifacts. Very believable and funny story.


re: memes

You're confusing the medium with the message. The memes are real whether the message is true or not--otherwise no one could be infected.

[Shigawire]

that posits an EMP disaster that wipes out all electronic records. The story then assumes archeologists 400 years later have put together the story of American history from oral traditions and scraps of unearthed artifacts.

Hah! Fascinating.

But.. possible. EMP disasters may include Solar Storm and maybe even a man-made device in the future will have this nasty effect..
I hope we find better, more permanent ways to store information.

[Portuguese Rebel]

re: the Flood. Since we're talking about oral histories, it is not really necessary that all the known catastrophic Floods happened at the same time. If your little tribe has an oral history of a Flood that happened to your ancestors and has been passed down through the ages, and then you hear another account of a Flood that happened to some other little tribe, you are naturally going to associate the two histories together. In fact, you would naturally interpret the new story as confirmation of the truth of your own historical tale. In oral histories, two stories that happened "long, long ago" basically means "at the same time" to the listener.

Ahh! but this is a different story altogether. I'm strongly inclined that this was indeed the case.

"- And if our neighbours also had the flood it must have been huge"

"- Indeed... I bet the whole world was flooded..."

"- Maybe..."

that posits an EMP disaster that wipes out all electronic records. The story then assumes archeologists 400 years later have put together the story of American history from oral traditions and scraps of unearthed artifacts

there is still alot of stuff in paper support. The archeologists would be ok i guess

[the Black Prince]

yes, but if we take that most anciant civs grew up around the med, and we know that the med was once a fertile river valley, and that 10,000 yrs ago, the land bridge was destroyed in an impact event, and the med was flooded. greece egypt persia/sumeria/babylon north africa and celts all get flood story from there...
an impact event to do that would have hit in the atlantic (believed to be hudson bay) so tidal waves in america... thats the aztecs.
we also know the same event led to melting of the polar ice, and a 200-400 ft rise in sea levels globally. we're not talking about mass inundation and the whole world being covered in water... but many civs were coastally based in those days anyway, and if the coastal areas are flooded.

then, if you add in diffusionist ways of thinking, those cultures not affected, get the story from those that were. some (ok, very few) scientists will agree that there was definatly precolumbian contact. many more will tentativly agree.
leif erikson is a good example, but viking roman and phoenician could all have possibly done it.
and there is less reason for turkish ancestors to pass on to mongols, too chinese etc... it spreads.


but archaelogical, and geological evidence points to there being a global flood event. not a whole world under water event, but global flooding.

[Kazak borispavlovgrozny]

Originally posted by the Black Prince@Jun 20 2004, 05:02 PM
but archaelogical, and geological evidence points to there being a global flood event. not a whole world under water event, but global flooding.

oh, yeah . I get it, NOT the WORLD, but the GLOBE!!!!