Iamb,
Yes. Please steer clear of everything I post at ILP since it only encourages your regurgitation of your personal beliefs. I’ve heard them ad nauseum. My philosophy is not so much concerned with the other side of the grave as with what we can think here and now about our future on this Earth. Besides I see reincarnation as a more moral human outcome than the old reward and punishment afterlives.
No problem. [-o<
Free at last! Free at last! Great God Almighty—free at last!
God is physical in acts of creative evolution, metaphysical in projections of becoming.
God is the situation and its cause. Without God there would be nothing.
God is present in one’s awe of Nature’s bounty and beauty.
God is also present when two or more people of good will come together in one accord.
God is present in the hunger for righteousness.
God is present in experience of God, about which words fail.
God is unconditional, universal Love.
duplicate
The part strives to reunite with the Whole. The God within is a part of the God outside the body of consciousness. Reclamation is God’s desire. Spiritual masters recognize the longing for completion as evidence of God’s inner Self, the God within. Creation separates to reunite. The individual eye (I) is a part of the whole vision.
Dawkins VS Paley–where do you stand?
Has anybody here read about “the blind watchmaker”?
.
Yes, a long time ago.
.
Yes, a long time ago.
.[/quote}
So you have no opinion now on God as designer of all that exists? Dawkins trumps Paley only among those who have limited views of science.
I don’t think Dawkins is a stupid man but he is ignorant of many philosophical subjects. The meaning of stupid is different to many people, however. I told you before, more simply that, I think he is a troll.
I would say that he has damaged his own reputation.
I have my own belief on creation, that I am sure Dawkins would happily argue with me about, but I would not spend any time on it because I don’t think I would get any benefit out of it.
Creation by random reactions of certain chemicals, perpetuated by fortuitous advances through evolution, is an idea that suffers from lack of an answer to the inevitable, moral question–“Why.” This is a question a child might ask. Whereas the child might be satisfied with the answer How, an adult needs needs to hear about the Why. Evolution without purpose suggests humans without purpose. But humans are meaning addicts, which is why the Why persists. That God did it, regarding Creation and Evolution, leaves the question Why. Science is good at telling us how. Religion is supposed to tell us why. Can the two be complementary?
Maybe others would benefit from hearing your ideas about creation.
- A prevalent myth from experience of genetic evolution is the existence of Micky Mouse.
False
False. I need a sex-robot indistinguishable from a real woman, except that she never says no. Sadly no such thing exists. Same as God. Peopl think they need an answer to the meaning of the universe, so they just imagine one.
You have things exactly backwards. Real needs, rather than just whimsical ideas, are only present because they already exist in nature, otherwise no natural selection would have required them.
God is not a need, anymore than a sexbot is a need.
“I need a sex-robot indistinguishable from a real woman, except that she never says no.”
I have a sex bot and when the batteries are low, she’ll say ‘not tonight honey I’m tired’ in a creepy male Taiwanese accent. You’d think they at least make a sexy female voice. I dunno maybe I got the settings wrong.
Sculptor,
If you are trying to derail this thread by demeaning its ideas or simply by opposing them, you have done a good job; and you will have followers.
About eating-- we take in the same chemicals of which we are composed–proteins, vitamins, etc. If we did not do so we would not exist for long as living beings.
The hunger for God from within us is a Schweitzer idea. I doubt you have read him.
But here I’m giving you more respect by responding than you have given me by posting.
From having eyes, we are able to imagine and to build cameras. Because we have vocal cords and ears, we are able to build radios and tvs. Because we have brains, we can imagine and build computers. " Our creativity is our image of God"==Nicholas Berdyaev
Trolling.
Seriously, if you are an atheist or nihilist, this thread is not for you.
The Op pertains to the idea that God is active in the creative determinism of evolution, hence knowable. Perhaps I have failed here in explaining how consciousness derives from evolution. All can see that it does. But I believe God is evident in what we can see of this universe, evident in continuous creativity and maintenance.
It will not do to simply tell me this is a false perspective; tell me why you believe that.