Re: Mind's Eye The evolution of god

Heh and do you fail to see the irony in such a strongly held belife?

 

I belife in a creator God, but I do so based on faith.  So when a person does not based on also faith, then by what mechanisim is my faith correct and theres incorrect?  The truth is we don't know, we each belive as we belive.  In such a case then the same charge can be leveled at both sides by each other. The Godless are arrogant because they claim with the knowledge of truth that God does not exist, yet are our claims any less so?

 

 

 

On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 11:05:13 UTC+1, andrew vecsey wrote:

Very kind of you to welcome me to your interesting group. I enjoy reading the many posts and appreciate all the thinking minds in this group.
I know that it sounds harsh and closed minded and arrogant and ignorant to call anyone "arrogant and ignorant". We are all ignorant. When we claim to believe that we know and are certain without any doubt that life evolved by itself, then I find that arrogant. When we  do not acknowledge that life is a great gift, then we are ingrates. When we do not believe that life cycles on after our momentary existence in it, than I believe that we ignore and are blind to our deep individual and unique personal purpose of life. 

On Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:38:54 AM UTC+2, Lee Douglas wrote:

Hello Andrew, and let me extend my welcome to you as I have not yet done so.

 

Some say that before the beiging theer was only God.  God in spirt, until God said 'let their be light' and Lo matter was created.  Created form the spirt of the creator.  So that God is both a part of and apart form the creation.  Yeah this is what I place my belife on.  However doing so I realise that such belifes stem from a place of unresonableness, that is it not resonable to belive as I do, there is no evidance, and some might say that evidance for the belife of no God is growing greater daily.  So be it, i am more than comfatable with this.

 

Those that do not belive however are certioanly no more "arrogant and ignorant ingrates who are left without any personal deep meaning and far reaching purpose" than the rest of us.  I for one would love to hear why you belive this?

 

 

On Sunday, 19 August 2012 10:24:04 UTC+1, andrew vecsey wrote:

Allan, please understand that most of the topics I write about and views that I describe are not original so please do not assume that I claim originality. Also please understand that not all viewpoints that I describe in simplifying terms are viewpoints that I believe in. Lastly please understand that I do not claim to understand everything that I write about. The reason that I wanted to start a discussion of this topic and all other topics that I will offer to this group in the future is to gain other viewpoints of the members so that I can learn from you all. I believe that all viewpoints have some truth to them and would like to have a glimpse of topics that interest me from all vantage points. The opinions that I summarize are just possibilities that I find interesting and plausible. I value other people`s opinions, especially when they have open minds and hearts. 

In answer to your feedback.....yes you have it right and you have understood correctly what I proposed... about the material and god strings being separate until the god string manipulates the material string. Then of course they are not separate any more.  I also do not understand the origins of these two strings. What I would like from you is your viewpoint as to how life started. Did it evolve or was it created. What do you think?. If you believe that life was created, then who created the creator.     

On Sunday, August 19, 2012 8:20:18 AM UTC+2, Allan Heretic wrote:

Sorry Andrew, your summery is nothing I have not read or heard before. If it is what you chose to believe I will accept it as that and you are  welcome to your beliefs.

But you have said you what to have a discussion..  so what you have told me is that your God is totally separate from the material world. That's common beliefs  part two he only fiddled with the material world.

To clarify this that is saying that there are two strings,, one of the material string and one of the God string. They collided and the God string manipulated the material sting to create life..  I think I have it right. What I do not understand is the origin of both the God string and the origin of the material string..  yet you say they have a limited beginnings.

Sorry so confusing..

Allan

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:58 PM, andrew vecsey <andrew...@gmail.com> wrote:

The following is an essay I would like to start a discussion on. It is based on a YouTube video in my series of simplifying various topics. You can see the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9YdYiqggsA

A summary of the idea is as follows:

• Energy and matter spontaneously formed without cause according to the presently held quantum theory.
• Matter evolved to form stable atoms while Energy evolved to form stable patterns.
• The stable patterns of energy evolved to form thoughts of all possibilities.
• Thoughts evolved to intelligence.
• Intelligence evolved to manipulate atoms to form basic life.
• Basic life evolved to form complex life.
• Complex life evolved to form thinking life.

The text of the video is below.

God evolved to create life and allowed life to evolve into man.

Science and religion are like mass and energy or like life and death. They are opposite sides of the same coin. While science proposes that life evolved by random chance, religion claims that it was created by intelligent design. Both points of view are driven by faith, a desire to believe in either scientific theories or religious dogmas as currently accepted and taught by recognized experts in their own narrow fields of expertise.

Truth of knowledge, like beauty and like good and evil is in the eyes of the beholder. While science focuses on how things work, religion wonders about why things work the way they do. Just like you can not have good without evil or death without life, both sides, science and religion, complement each other giving theories and dogmas meaning that otherwise remain meaningless.  

Science considers things that can be detected and sensed by our senses and analyzed by our brains. Religion on the other hand considers things that can be felt with the heart.  Atoms left to themselves and given enough time can and will eventually form replicating molecules that like letters can be used to code life. But having the letters fall into appropriate meaningful patterns by random chance requires more time than is available in the 15 billion years since the beginning of the universe, even when the attempt to make life is in carefully designed laboratories.  Expecting life to form from by random combinations of chemicals can be compared to expecting monkeys who blindly type to write Shakespearean sonnets with deep meanings. This is only conceivable and theoretically possible when given an infinite amount of time. But reality has its bounds and infinity like perfection are just theoretical boundaries that have places only in mathematics and imaginations.   

Science with its quantum theories shows that there is a hidden reality allowing for energy and matter to spontaneously appear and disappear without any cause. While matter, like a drop of water, is bounded and has form, energy, like water vapor has no bounds or form. Matter moves with a speed that can be measured and slowed down while energy like a thought is not constrained by speed, time or space. While life can be rationally conceived as evolving by chance and selectively fine tuned to its complexity as shown in man, man`s soul and his intuitive powers remain irrational to scientists.

Everything has a bit of truth to it. Scientists who refute the possibility of a creator show just as much arrogance and ignorance as religious leaders who refute gods of other religions. One of the main arguments against evolution is the amount of time it needs. One of the main arguments against creation by intelligent design is the circular question of who created the creator.

Our choice to believe if life was a result of evolution or of intelligent design does not exclude one opinion over the other but can be a mixture of both. We can entertain the possibility that the intelligent designer was either not intelligent enough or sufficiently intelligent to only seed atoms and molecules with basic information to enable them to evolve further on their own.

The paradoxical dilemma of who created the creator can be circumnavigated by the possibility that the original creator was not matter, but energy. Just like thinking of anything is much faster and much easier than building it, it becomes conceivable that energy patterns could have evolved in a random chance way and finely tuned by selective processes to reach intelligence similar to how most scientists believe that patterns of atoms and molecules evolved to form intelligent life.

Energy patterns could have evolved to a point that they manipulated atoms to desired patterns and forms to code the information required for life and to allow them to evolve on their own to complex intelligent beings able to wonder at and eventually to solve the riddle of where they came from, where they are going and why they are alive. Meaning and purpose could then be given to our fleeting moment of existence.

We all have freedoms and desires that allow us to have faith and to believe in whatever we want to believe in. Only by believing in an intelligent designer are we able to acknowledge and be humbly grateful for our lives and appreciate its full meaning and purpose. By refusing to believe in a creator and refuting an intelligent designer we remain arrogant and ignorant ingrates who are left without any personal deep meaning and far reaching purpose.

--
 
 
 

--
 (

  )

|_D Allan

Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.

--