Bringing science and religion together around a common understanding of the origin of life.

[larens]

"Does "debating" here mean what it means in the rest of the world, which is coming up with logically significant arguments that might convince someone?"

Yes that's what Christians do. We tell people about God, in hopes that they will believe and receive salvation.

We were not the ones who came to you, it was you who joined a Christian forum. So why be frustrated and rude because things aren't going your way?

Anyway you said you were going elsewhere.

Take Care.

I did not say I was going elsewhere. I can expect a small minority who want to get their way to deliver a barrage when I enter a forum. When they get tired I can then talk to others in a more civil manner and learn what they are thinking.

 

[SoulWeaver]

So what is it that I am not understanding? Your statement is consistent with what I said. Both our statements are cerebral, since they are in writing.

As for your use of the word "snarky", I am not being snarky. I am not being derogatory in an indirect way. I am trying to be as direct as I can be without being overly blunt. I cannot give my replies long consideration, because I am under a barrage.

I did not slander anyone. I complained about verbal abuse of the rules of civil discussion.

The fact that "Jerusalem" has at least two meanings does not prevent me from choosing one of the meanings.

Just to make that clear first, the message to the snarkies is my forum signature and isn't directed to you, it's just my sig so it's under my every post.

Even though faith is a means of acquiring information, science and faith will never be one, so reading that first post I already felt sorry about you wasting so much of your precious energy and time. Science deals in empirical, quantitative things that are perceptible and reside within observable reality. Faith deals in qualitative things (like love), absolutes and beyond the realm of 5 senses. You can't measure or empirically observe any of that. So it's like apples and oranges.

Nobody can explain a koan in words. What I noticed is that your general approach to these matters overall is extremely cerebral and with a logical mind. So reading your post, I perceived that you do not speak like a zen master or even a student. That's all. You're trying to grapple these things with your brain because you think your brain must be smarter than this ole religious thing. But good luck employing that approach with a Zen koan (or the Bible), you will just exhaust yourself but never be enlightened.

What you described in your initial post is amalgamation of different belief systems into one, and this is called religious syncretism. As you must be aware, this is nothing new under the sun. I also noticed how you seem to assert that you know math better than all Christians and have scientific authority, you speak as if there were never Christians who were scientists or mathematicians.

 

[larens]

Mat 18:3
And said, Verily I say to you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 19:23
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 18:4

Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

You are assuming that "New Jerusalem" and the "kingdom of heaven" are the same thing. If their literary contexts are different, then they are different. "New Jerusalem" is an end times concept. Jesus's ministry was almost 2000 years earlier.

 

[SoulWeaver]

You are assuming that "New Jerusalem" and the "kingdom of heaven" are the same thing. If their literary contexts are different, then they are different. "New Jerusalem" is an end times concept. Jesus's ministry was almost 2000 years earlier.

Let's put that debate aside for now.
I'm curious if you have ever considered what the Scriptures say about who has understanding of the Scriptures? The Bible you are trying to interpret itself teaches, that it is more or less designed to evade book knowledge efforts and cleverness exploits.

Psalms 119:130 The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.
Luke 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[TabinRivCA]

You are assuming that "New Jerusalem" and the "kingdom of heaven" are the same thing. If their literary contexts are different, then they are different. "New Jerusalem" is an end times concept. Jesus's ministry was almost 2000 years earlier.

You think you know what I'm assuming. Anyway God has it is perfect. God bless.

 

[larens]

Just to make that clear first, the message to the snarkies is my forum signature and isn't directed to you, it's just my sig so it's under my every post.[/Quote}

Your signature is rather unwelcoming, because it is unclear whom it is aimed at. Notice I immediately found two points in my discussion that I thought it was aimed at.

Even though faith is a means of acquiring information, science and faith will never be one, so reading that first post I already felt sorry about you wasting so much of your precious energy and time. Science deals in empirical, quantitative things that are perceptible and reside within observable reality. Faith deals in qualitative things (like love), absolutes and beyond the realm of 5 senses. You can't measure or empirically observe any of that. So it's like apples and oranges.

Religion deals with both. Christian Chat deals with both.

Nobody can explain a koan in words. What I noticed is that your general approach to these matters overall is extremely cerebral and with a logical mind. So reading your post, I perceived that you do not speak like a zen master or even a student. That's all. You're trying to grapple these things with your brain because you think your brain must be smarter than this ole religious thing. But good luck employing that approach with a Zen koan (or the Bible), you will just exhaust yourself but never be enlightened.

I have been classifying myself as a scientist. Combining that with some equivalent of zen mastery is an appealing idea that has already occurred to me. Such mastery takes practice. Other than direct science what I have been doing is some type of practice.

What you described in your initial post is amalgamation of different belief systems into one, and this is called religious syncretism. As you must be aware, this is nothing new under the sun. I also noticed how you seem to assert that you know math better than all Christians and have scientific authority, you speak as if there were never Christians who were scientists or mathematicians.

I am quite aware of religious syncretism since it is ubiquitous in my study of religion. My assertion about being better at math has nothing specifically to do with Christians. To the best of my knowledge, I know the math specific to the mathematical reduction of reality better than everybody else in the world. There may be someone else out there who is better, but I doubt it, because they are too likely to have come to my notice. There are just too many important scientific problems that I have tentatively solved without seeing other people being near solving them. Being an autodidact I am not blocked by the standard dogmas. Being in the realm beyond the standard dogmas is also why I am unpublished. I am overwhelmed by the problem of moving many tentative solutions to formally solved ones. At UC-Berkeley this has been called the "orthogonality" problem. My specialty is "orthogonal" to how academics normally define specialties.

 

[SoulWeaver]

@larens my sig is aimed at the snarky people just like it says - and they know who they are. If you read the description below the red, you will see clearly that my goal is to help improve quality of conversations on CC in general by discouraging snarky attitude towards others in conversation. It's been such a season, so I felt like putting it. It's not permanently my sig.

 

[larens]

You think you know what I'm assuming. Anyway God has it is perfect. God bless.

I can hardly assume anything else. I asked a question concerning one phrase; and your answer contained the other phrase.

 

[larens]

@larens my sig is aimed at the snarky people just like it says - and they know who they are. If you read the description below the red, you will see clearly that my goal is to help improve quality of conversations on CC in general by discouraging snarky attitude towards others in conversation. It's been such a season, so I felt like putting it. It's not permanently my sig.

If you keep it, I suggest making it dark enough to easily read, It was so light that I did not even read it before replying to the references.

 

[TabinRivCA]

I can hardly assume anything else. I asked a question concerning one phrase; and your answer contained the other phrase.

Jesus talks of Heaven and we are not at the New Jerusalem yet, if one should pass upwards.
Btw, do you agree God's ways are higher than ours as stated in the Bible?
So you seem to believe in the New Jerusalem, do you believe in everything else in the Bible?

 

[larens]

Let's put that debate aside for now.
I'm curious if you have ever considered what the Scriptures say about who has understanding of the Scriptures? The Bible you are trying to interpret itself teaches, that it is more or less designed to evade book knowledge efforts and cleverness exploits.

Psalms 119:130 The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.
Luke 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I focus on numerical passages to construct a timeline for history. I, of course, have to also interpret passages that give a context. I doubt that most of what I am deeply interpreting are the parts of the Scriptures that are meant to be easily understood for spiritual guidance.

 

[larens]

Jesus talks of Heaven and we are not at the New Jerusalem yet, if one should pass upwards.
Btw, do you agree God's ways are higher than ours as stated in the Bible?
So you seem to believe in the New Jerusalem, do you believe in everything else in the Bible?

God's ways are higher by definition.

I do not believe in everything else in a literal sense. Some of the stories are a complicated mixture of fact and fiction. New Jerusalem is an example. It is an impossibly large cube with a rich metaphorical interpretation.

 

[SoulWeaver]

I focus on numerical passages to construct a timeline for history. I, of course, have to also interpret passages that give a context. I doubt that most of what I am deeply interpreting are the parts of the Scriptures that are meant to be easily understood for spiritual guidance.

You are missing my point... It nowhere said easily understood, either. I suppose I am not able to carry my point across to you. Keep doing what you're doing and good luck to you.
About to go to sleep, good night.

 

[TabinRivCA]

God's ways are higher by definition.

I do not believe in everything else in a literal sense. Some of the stories are a complicated mixture of fact and fiction. New Jerusalem is an example. It is an impossibly large cube with a rich metaphorical interpretation.

Nothing is impossible with God, Mt 19:26.
Btw Noah's Ark has been found on Mt Ararat just as the Bible Says.
Good night.

 

[larens]

You are missing my point... It nowhere said easily understood, either. I suppose I am not able to carry my point across to you. Keep doing what you're doing and good luck to you.
About to go to sleep, good night.

You are right. My statement was not consistent with "hid these things from the wise and prudent". I need some sleep too.

 

[larens]

Nothing is impossible with God, Mt 19:26.
Btw Noah's Ark has been found on Mt Ararat just as the Bible Says.
Good night.

We have no convincing evidence that God chooses to act in a supernatural way, especially when it relates to giant cities.
Btw There are ancient reports of an ark on Mt Ararat that is presumed to be have been built by survivalist cult. There is no evidence for a flood that reached to the top of Mt Ararat. The best evidence is that the story of the great flood relates to an exceptionally large flood on the Indus River that destroyed the city of Aratta.

 

[posthuman]

I will confess to not being able to read the Bible in the original languages it which it was written. Can you? I have to resort to commentary to separate meanings that are conflated in English. "Knowledge" is an umbrella term in English, so your quotation is nearly useless.

"The Holy One" is particular. a person. "knowledge" of that Individual may encompass many varied instances, but being knowledge "of" this Particular it is all rightly described as theological.

your argument that the statement is 'nearly useless' because words can have several nuances of meaning renders all your dialogue equally useless -- you're typing words, also.

You're trying to grapple these things with your brain because you think your brain must be smarter than this ole religious thing.

@larens it is perhaps the whole point of a koan to establish the absurd inadequacy of your reason. SoulWeaver is right, you are misappropriating 'the sound of one hand clapping' - in doing so you exemplify it.

 

[posthuman]

I know that the phrase "intellectual power" is not in the old writings. I am writing to make things comprehensible for a modern audience.

You misunderstood. The point has nothing to do with a particular turn of phrase being absent - the Bible does not describe 'wisdom' in terms of cognitive faculty or cleverness. Instead it describes it in theological terms.

 

[oyster67]

I take it that you believe in a god. How do you experience that?

Romans
8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

 

[SoulWeaver]

Besides philosophical compatibility, the evidence for Israelite religion coming from Mesopotamian Moon worship is that the founder came from the two cities that were the centers of Moon worship and his cohort had names from that subculture. What is your evidence against?

If so, the evidence is contained within what you just said yourself: that the founder came out of these places. The early people of the Bible always came out of the pagan societies and the prevalent practices of the day to seek the promise of God, they "ran to the hills" from the prevalent culture. The "setting themselves apart to the Lord" and being "a peculiar people" permeates the entire Bible from start to finish.