The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Religion and science: respecting the differences > Comments

Religion and science: respecting the differences : Comments

By Michael Zimmerman, published 31/5/2010

The teachings of most mainstream religions are consistent with evolution.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 130
  7. 131
  8. 132
  9. Page 133
  10. 134
  11. 135
  12. 136
  13. 137
  14. All
well said..dan..anyhow..

there is..no/proof..of macro-evolution
[that is..for a cold-blooded..fish..
to walk from the sea..as a warm/blood mamm-el]

but/those..taking..it..on faith
believe..the impossable..because they cant..face/..the truth

man-kind..dont-know..how..good/god...done-it

cant replicate..
thus..dares/to..speculate

it/needs..to rewrite..meanings/definitions
spin-spin..in lue/of..facts..man-kind..will never know

mankind cant/even..make a membrane/like..fake..
copy..of even..one single-cell

thus talks/of..mud/bubbles..
that only decieve's..those needing/to..believe a godless/theory

we can refer/to..tikitalus...or mud-skippers
till the cows/mutate back into whales..lol

but the/fact..remains..they got..no hips either
and arnt mammels..have/no..fur...
and an..endless-list..of other/...gap's..in the theory..[their theories]

its just too-hard..to grasp...the concept..of good[god]creator/sustaininglife/living

emmanuel..[god with-in..us/all..]

even when..famouse/personages..
return.from..the dead..[like jesus]
they still..dont get/it

when even...lawrence..of arabia..reveals..he/aint..dead
its still so/what..

making every/attempt..
mere huh-mans..can con-cieve..to diss/belief

in our next/life..we are mere..aether/souls..[bodies]
yet ani-mated..from within..by gods wholly-spirit
and our..emotive-energy..[ego]

where..[our]-emotions..are refected..from within
by gods inner/light..even deeper..with-in
revealing..our aura..

[in/but..one of the..7 ways of sight]..seeing

in the next/life...lawrence..wrote..emotion/is..a form..of substance

[of course..this/is only..what he believed..then
at the/time..he directed[mrs/sherwood]..to write/that]

but just/think-of..the implications..of that reality/..
it makes the current..most popular/research-field..of graphite..[graphi][bucki-balls etc..]..pale into insignificance..

imagine..emotion's..each/having..its-own reality
just as..jesus revealed..[mine fathers-house..has many-rooms]

who would/have..thought..it true
[that nothing..can-be hidden]
yet as lawrence..reveals..
our emot-ions..are able to/be..read like a book

his biggest-problem/being..
he cant hide/that..he could hide..in this world..[under words]...

the aim..for him..to reach the next-level...
is..[much like mine]..is to tone-it..down]..emotionally/speaking

i dont..like knowing..in the next-life..i will have/to..hide in the grey realms..[simply because i/have passion...

when the aim/is to remove..those passions..injurouse to self or other

its so..easy..to claim/science..then remain..ignorant
by/not..researching the facts..of all matter's

my notes read
the mat-erial..of aeth-erial/...;..matter
is ill-lumed..from within..via our...e=motion's

what/..lacks..e-motion..is inert/matter
but we know..even in-ert..matter
has atomic/..motion..deep within

but its..all..too deep/for those..needing/wanting..to speculate
about that they think..they all=ready..?..know..or claim/to..believe

anyhow..thanks to you dan..
they can/at least..comprehend..what..you say
even if/they cant..refute it

thank-god..this life..[and the next]
is about us..knowing ourselves

it really dont/matter..if they dont...get*..me..[or you]

just..so long/as they..seek to/know..them-selves..
[and thus..know,..emmanu=EL]

god/is..
with-in..them/too...
sustaining their..inner nurture/..nature..naturally

peace..to you/all
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 19 September 2010 7:37:17 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Severin,

I am not sure if your first paragraph was meant as a compliment, but anyhow, thanks. It reminds me of a Hungarian friend who told me that to him I was a Hungarian, which I am not, but took it as a compliment on my Hungarian.

I am not sure how, if at all, you want me to comment on the rest. I am aware of your views on these matters, and I do not see any point in contradicting them. Maybe you are also aware of my view, namely that faith, of whatever form or denomination, cannot be acquired through reasoning (nor lost, although the opposite is often felt by those affected). Rational arguments, in support of this or that belief can only lead to the broadening and better understanding of one’s own world-view - and/or to a deeper appreciation of opinions one does not share.

Non-alignment with any doctrine can indeed free you from having to justify it (if you indeed felt an urge to justify them). And, of course, religious and other attempts at understanding reality and the human condition (and reacting to this understanding) have been evolving over millennia. Christianity is an organic part in this evolution of ideas. Some of us believe it is the crucial part.

>> those that claim to treat women as goddesses - places women in metaphorical chains<<
I do not understand why not also “those who treat men as gods place them in metaphorical chains”, whatever that means.
Posted by George, Sunday, 19 September 2010 7:46:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello George,

Please excuse my delayed replies too.

Words can be facinating yet too often misunderstood. I am guilty no doubt.

Malcolm Muggeridge? I haven't thought about him years, maybe decades.

Dear Dan,

There was an excellent programme about the Cell on BBC Knowledge this week. Scientists took the "eye" gene from a mouse and transplanted it into the gamete of a fly. The fly grew eight functioning compound fly eyes over its body. Its seems that artifically mutated DNA recognised mouse eyes as fly eyes,thus, suggesting a common underlying decoder. That finding would support Evolution.

Why the eyes grew all over the place was that the dispersed mouse genes in the fly DNA was not distinguished towards a distinct body segment in the host cell. Under nomal natural circumstances the evolved cell would have instructions codified by segment. Recall also that each fly cell has full set of its DNA instructions.

On another topic, would you say that it takes light a few decades to reach us from a nearbt star, yet not billions of years from a distant galaxy?
Posted by Oliver, Sunday, 19 September 2010 12:53:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
oliver/quote..<<Recall also/that each..fly-cell..has full set..of/its DNA..instructions.>>.sorry..bro...not/once..the cells has become differentiated

i was studying ..that frankenstein-stuff...25 years ago

we have long..grafted..differentiated-cells all over poor inocent..litle beasties....

i recall specificlly...growing..wing's..from wing-buds..on many different parts of chickens...[the excuse then was to try an d unravel..mosaic-ism]

you know mosaic..like the cat...with three colours
[tourtis-shell]felines

we did all sorts of stuff way/back..then
we put feather buds..onto feet..grew rooster-tails on hens
black feathers..on homogeniuos..red/chickens..etc

you can..only grow...the particulare..[differentiated]..body-bit...
once the cell has become differentiated...
[ie became..geneticly/expressing..its god intended..role

[..a feather..or a heart-cell..or a limb/bud
..can only become..what it was meant to become..
after it has differentiated]

this frankenstein..destraction..
has NOTHING TO DO WITH EVOLVING
its not evolution..at best its only grafting
and they were doing that..way/back before ceasor

but aghain
that has NOTHING..to do with evolution
not with micro/ecvolution..
nor macro/evolution

i tried to explain it to you many times
i studied this stuff..for most of my life

MACRO-EVOLUTION..is a FRAUD
it has NEVER been/done
it has NEVER been/observed
it has NEVER been/recorded

its a lie
it simply cant happen
the way your mad/profffor,thinks it MAY

its a theory...
get it

a way-out...theory
sold to us..as children..
to grow..little godless demons
cannon fodder,..for the elites..
needing dumbed/down fools

who will believe...anything

except/..the truth

...god is love
or god is good
god has mercy..grace

we are immortals..having an incarnate...life-term
one life-sentance..of freewill..
to realise the truth..of how vile others can be..by obvious deciets

not you of course
you just been taken-in by decievers

i wish i hadnt studied..this so much
fools..think me mad..

but id..rather have/them..think it
than to let/them keep..thinking/nothing

mad is better
than accept the..evolving..insane-theory..
of evolution..based on lies
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 19 September 2010 6:23:47 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear OUG,

You are correct: The study was quite old. The programme was about the development of knowledge about the Cell.

The comments were not especially dirtected towards you, or your previous posts, wherein some other evolutionists would not hold that even microevolution exists. Hence, the post. Smaller still, we have the QM realm.
Posted by Oliver, Monday, 20 September 2010 10:18:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"its not evolution..at best its only grafting" - OUG

If one were only grafting, the fly would grown mouse eyes. A deeper decoder recognised a primal eye, and translated the the mouse gene as a fly eye, suggesting a common root. I guess its a bit a monolinguist English speaker sometimes recognising Greek words, owing to a common source.
Posted by Oliver, Monday, 20 September 2010 12:35:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 130
  7. 131
  8. 132
  9. Page 133
  10. 134
  11. 135
  12. 136
  13. 137
  14. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy