Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: Speed Of Light

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by daViper on August 3, 1999 23:09:18 UTC

: : : : Keeper: I'm in total agreement where evolution is concerned. In fact, I believe that the idea of evolution cannotes progress and is the most meaningful concept to come out of science. So when the fundamentalists attack evolution they are in essence trying to strip science of its meaning. : : : : I take the concept, however, into the realm of the supernatural by combining it with the concept of reincarnation or transmigration as it's called in Judaism. This allows for the evolution of the soul. But the evolution of souls does not stop with humans. I do not think we die and go to heaven and become forever the same. I think the cyclic process of birth and death continues in the supernatural realm except that we souls, and hopefully our consciousness, just cycles in higher planes, forever becoming more perfect until we either feed into the godhead as the Buddhists seem to think or become gods ourselves, perhaps the gods of a new universe. : : : : So the holistic process is just for god to make more of him/herself. Earth is a farm. God is the farmer using evolution to grow souls. Once self-consciousness is developed, the crop can be harvested, hopefully one at a time rather than all at once as some prophecies foretell. But the cultivation does not stop on the physical level. Human souls like catepellars become angels and eventually become gods. : : : : Our species can only be in danger if this system breaks down. Then we may all be harvested. : : : : Regards, : : : : Richard David : : : : PS: My understanding is that the idea of reincarnation was abolished from Christianity by Emperor Constantine because if his subjects thought that they would be given many chances to attain heaven, they would be much more difficult for the Roman authorities to control. Not going to heaven has been used as a threat by the church ever since.

: : : bzrd here; Evolution is, at its essence, an interplay between environmental factors and the genome(s)of the species. Mutations are thought to occur by random as well as any given environmental elements. What evidence is there to lead us to conclude that life originated by a random process? If there is no evidence to support random origination is it not presumtive to assume that there is randomness in its development? : : ::::::::::::: : : This is a good point bzrd. I don't want to say that I rule out some form of "divine intervention" in the formation of the first life, but Richard Dawkins, in "The Blind Watchmaker" does point out some very logical processes in which randomness CAN produce such. He uses computer models very effectively.

: : I'm not saying he is right, (I don't know), but he does put forth very logical models for how it COULD occur.

: From Richard: My opinion on the need for randomness is that it is necessary but not sufficient. I think evolution is necessary, and evolution implies a degree of randomness. But if I look at how I perceive that god has intervened and guided my life, often whether I liked it or not, it has been through randomness and coincidence. So I believe in the combination of creation and evolution that some call guided evolution. And biology teaches us that not all that much guidance is necessary. Some very subtle pushes here and there can profoundly alter the course of evolution. And if we end up in a deadend, of course there is always nateral disaster to help start all over again. ::::::::::: Sounds like a workable methodology to me. I don't know if you are right or not, but I sure as heck would never say you were wrong.

I can never find a reason to speculate any of this beyond a general and conceptual way. The Big Bang, the first occurrance of life, these are all things that beg belief in a higher power than ourselves. There are certain things we will never know, but no harm in trying to find out.

The only way religion ever loses me in any of this is when it tries to get so specific in its dogma that I have to believe the Earth was created 6,243 years, 2 months, 11 days, 14 hours, 23 minutes and 17 seconds ago. (If I may be cynical for a moment). If I don't buy this, I am therefore a godless atheist who is doomed to rot in hell for eternity. Right!

Folks who want to define the specifics of what God may or may not have done are not only missing the point of spirituality in the first place, they eleveate themselves to the level of the God they claim belief in. A decidedly arrogant stance they do not even see themselves.

I certainly cannot know the mind of God, but all the workings of the universe that I have learned so far seem perfectly logical to me and in keeping with the way any Creator would go about it. Even if I don't know ALL the details.


Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins