On Monday, 10 December 2012 13:25:04 UTC, archytas wrote:
I'm more materialist than RP in that I see religion as more to do with--
what we do with and for each other - this said I prefer private prayer
to collective knee-bending. How does tolerance fare once religionists
become 'so pure' they can treat anyone else as infidel?
On Dec 10, 1:33 am, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The original post, that is, hmm sorry. :)
>
> On 12/9/2012 5:40 PM, James wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > RP, I have been considering your post and have taken it in the view of a
> > biological perspective. It is one that I do think important but I am
> > still left wondering why to attach such significance in an exclusive
> > sense. It may be that I am overthinking the concept, it is one that I
> > hold respect for but not to a degree of conclusiveness. Is there more I
> > should examine?
>
> > Browsing the TimesOfIndia recently I found talk about the common views
> > on China and worry over world dominance. I imagine there are vicious
> > clashes between them and the Arab speaking regions, it seems unfortunate
> > perhaps like being surrounded by strong interests on each side. I
> > obviously have little political world knowledge. :)
>
> > On 12/9/2012 1:15 PM, RP Singh wrote:
> >> Religion is first and foremost about prayer and worship. There is no
> >> need for that but we must accept a morality code and adhere by it ,
> >> there should be a feeling of love for one's fellow creatures and
> >> tolerance towards them.
>
> >> On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 8:41 PM, archytas<nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Given what they have done with some decent spiritual messages Allan, I
> >>> sometimes think of 'them' as Xstains. I was born into the tradition,
> >>> but thought it was twaddle by the time Sunday school was interfering
> >>> with soccer and cricket. I have no doubt we should focus more on
> >>> spirituality, fellowship, hospitality, goodwill and sensitivity to
> >>> others. I just don't want to base this on a pack of lies, banning
> >>> women from hierarchies, prejudicing gays and xenophobic stuff about
> >>> outsiders and being part of god's chosen. It's hard to think like
> >>> this without being prejudiced against the 'worshipers of the blue and
> >>> white striped rabbit' and purveyors of godswank. The inner danger is
> >>> becoming religiously anti-religious. I'm actually rather touched by
> >>> good aspects of some of the stuff.
> >>> I have no idea why we are clinging to this rock - but I don't want it
> >>> to be about being amused by Aussie pranksters making hoax calls or
> >>> murals celebrating vile killing such as one finds in the Vatican.
> >>> Science clearly provides us no answers to our spiritual plight and
> >>> religion as I witness it internally is largely about future memory
> >>> with less myth in it and less reason to take religion as we might
> >>> otherwise take opiates.
> >>> A colleague working in India is saying his students are reading Mein
> >>> Kampf - more or less replacing the word Jew with Muslim and agreeing
> >>> the plot entirely. We could do with some sensible religion and
> >>> economics to fill the void that leaves people this vulnerable.
> >>> Knowledge of thermodynamics or the biochemistry of life isn't going to
> >>> do that for us.
>
> >>> On Dec 8, 10:01 am, Allan H<allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> xtian aka christianity
>
> >>>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 8:02 AM, rigs<rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> It depends on what religion you are referring to. Very funny line
> >>>>> about Pilate! :-)
>
> >>>>> On Dec 6, 4:09 am, archytas<nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Sounds like something Pontius Pilate might have used.
>
> >>>>>> I guess that David Deutsch and constructor theory tries to get
> >>>>>> back to
> >>>>>> reminding science about its root guesses Allan. I take from
> >>>>>> 'Spartacus Ants' sacrificing themselves to destroy slaver ants that
> >>>>>> pre-human biology 'knows' something of survival instinct.
>
> >>>>>> Descartes had it that until we could get to a point of re-evaluating
> >>>>>> against his radical doubt one had to trust in a beneficent god.
> >>>>>> Whilst we can criticize his system, I think anti-religious science
> >>>>>> misses the beat on issues of how we can live until we know more. The
> >>>>>> spiritual thus has its place. There is plenty to avoid in its history
> >>>>>> of control fraud, abuse, sexism and war crimes - but plenty to learn
> >>>>>> in terms of grace and fellowship.
>
> >>>>>> On 6 Dec, 08:15, Allan H<allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> it is not for cleaning hands ,, it just gets rid of smell that you
> >>>>>>> can not get rid of no matter how much you wash.. you just wash after
> >>>>>>> youor hands are clean,, then the smell is gone.
> >>>>>>> Allan
>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:27 PM, gabbydott<gabbyd...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hm, I have never thought of using a steel soap bar for cleaning
> >>>>>>>> my hands. I
> >>>>>>>> use it occasionally for my pots and pans. And for the more
> >>>>>>>> difficult dirt on
> >>>>>>>> my hands I use a pumice stone or lemon. And more and more often
> >>>>>>>> I wear
> >>>>>>>> gloves or buy frozen and precut garlic and onion. But thanks for
> >>>>>>>> the tip.
> >>>>>>>> I'm sure that one day I'll make use of it. Why not steel instead
> >>>>>>>> of stone,
> >>>>>>>> you're right.
>
> >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 7:54:42 PM UTC+1, Allan Heretic wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> Well actually Gabby I have this stainless steel soap bar used for
> >>>>>>>>> getting rid of ordure off your hands things like onion, Garlic ,,
> >>>>>>>>> any strong ordure ,, just tried it on the epoxy smell left over
> >>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>> fixing my maxi egg coddler.
>
> >>>>>>>>> now one of the greatest mysteries of the universe,, how does it
> >>>>>>>>> work?
> >>>>>>>>> Allan
>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 6:38 PM, gabbydott<gabb...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> The pointlessness of the points' business. Like Lee, I find
> >>>>>>>>>> the God
> >>>>>>>>>> concept
> >>>>>>>>>> much more to the point. :)
>
> >>>>>>>>>> I don't follow Lee's sequencing model - first spirit, then
> >>>>>>>>>> matter -
> >>>>>>>>>> though.
> >>>>>>>>>> This sounds very man-made to me. ;)
>
> >>>>>>>>>> As for the storytelling aspect, yes, the Chronos story is much
> >>>>>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>>>>> vivid
> >>>>>>>>>> than the "God created (x) and saw it was good" story. That's
> >>>>>>>>>> true. But
> >>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> children are less likely to have bad dreams at night. Which is
> >>>>>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>>>>> good.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Sorry, Allan, I got carried away. What were you talking about?
>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2012/12/4 Allan H<allan...@gmail.com>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> a series of creation is at best a wild guess with no supporting
> >>>>>>>>>>> evidence..
> >>>>>>>>>>> Allan
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:42 PM, RP Singh<123...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You can pinpoint the beginning of this universe but not that of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Creation with its series of universes.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Allan H<allan...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not true the beginning can be pretty much
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> pinpointed .. as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> parallel universes that is just a wild guess with nothing
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to support
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other than it sounds good. There is more evidence
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> supporting the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> spiritual
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> realm than parallel universes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Allan
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Matrix ** th3 beginning light
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 4, 2012 2:26 PM, "RP Singh"<123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my view there is no beginning to creation. There is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> end to universes There are infinite no. of universes in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> parallel
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> continuously many universes are being born and many are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dying ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Creation which includes infinite universes in eternal time
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> , just
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Spirit, is without beginning and without end. The
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the nature of creation is dualistic and the Spirit is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-dual.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Lee
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas<leerev...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Andrew,
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heh I can envisage many things, but alas many of them are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> true.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distinguish between two things, matter and spirit.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mattter is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> physical, which includes physical 'matter' and also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> energy. To
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no paradox of who created the creator. Before the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> begining there
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God, God in spirit, and God created the creation out of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the spirt
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is all matter comes from spirit.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, 30 November 2012 18:32:43 UTC, andrew vecsey
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lee, I can see where all matter has to have an energy
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> component
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because matter is manifested as atoms which have motion
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in them.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also envision pure motion without involving any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atoms...like a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vibration in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fabric of space,
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 30, 2012 5:53:26 PM UTC+1, Lee Douglas
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heh except of course that when it comes right down to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.energy
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and matter is energy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, 30 November 2012 11:22:14 UTC, andrew vecsey
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> read more »
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário