Agreed! This topic has not defied the forum rules as I understand them (if a moderator can demonstrate that it has, I'll eat my hat).
It will end when it ends.

Sorry, but it does not become a theory (in the proper, scientific sense of the word) or a fact. Can you please demonstrate how the ancient hypotheses have stood up to 'multiple experiments'?

True, it ultimately makes no difference, but I don't think you grasped the point of this topic.

(apologies if this is in the wrong place, I couldn't decide if it belongs in religion or science chat)

Putting aside for a moment the various religious speculations about an immortal soul, afterlife, etc. here is something I hope all can agree with: the matter that is your body will one day return to energy.
The question is: how do you want this process to happen to your matter/energy?

To quote Dr Neil DeGrasse Tyson "I would request that my body, in death, be buried not cremated so that the energy content contained within it gets returned to the Earth so that flora and fauna can dine upon it just as I have dined upon flora and fauna throughout my life."

I find this very appealing! In a [very real] way this is life everlasting.
And yet cremation has its appeal too; it's like 'death in the fast lane'

One way or another we will all end up returning to energy.
How/where do you want to go?

Awesome pic!

I do too, I just can't help thinking that all our problems, all our disputes and wars are pitifully small compared to the threat of things far beyond the scope of our Tiny Blue Dot.

Agreed. everyone has their problems but all of us here living in a world with electricity, running water, internet access, etc. could stand to spare a thought for those without these comforts, for those who are starving.

Also, whenever things get to me I try to think about massive rocks zooming around our solar system that will one day hit us, or how our sun will one day burn out, or that the Milky Way will one day collide with Andromeda; suddenly my problems seem insignificant.

The Digital Dyspeptic is an interesting and amusing look at technology and its impact on society

http://digitaldyspeptic.wordpress.com/

episode 2 “digital darlings” (love and relationships in the digital age) is apt, methinks!

unfortunately there hasn't been a new episode in a while.

Beautiful, thanks

looks ace inverted too.

Good evening Smokey and (if your human is still up & about) Benji

BTW: stealth, coincidence, alternate profile or divine providence?
Any which way, I am amazed!

As I see it the argument is (not saying I believe one way or the other) that the impact crater [crudley] circled in these pics is distinct from all the other 'natural' looking craters. Regardless, it defintely does look different, more artifical than the others.

Just as nobody can prove that I don't have an invisible unicorn in my back garden; seriously, come and see for yourself! You can't see it, you can't disprove it. S1ow, I had thought you were above the likes of Ray Comfort and his 'banana' arguments.


There is a reason, and a damn good one at that; that, conversely, there is zero justification in imposing simple human emotions onto an Ultimate Intelligence. Were I this Intelligence I would find it offensive (or more likely, I would be so far above such petty matters that I wouldn't even acknowledge) that a mere animal as Man claims to know my mind.



Now you begin to make sense!
We, as petty mortals, know so little that any claim made by us about the almighty is inherently flawed. The only hope we have of coming to such an understanding is through time, discovery and experience.

MorningSong, a few things, if you'll do me the honour:
Firstly, far be it from me to dictate who should say what and where, but I was lead to believe (by the rules of this forum) that there were seperate forums for those of differing faiths; I cannot view or post on the Muslim forum, say, because I declared on my profile that I am not a Muslim.
Now, I'm all for an open and civilised discussion between people of any and all faiths (in fact I cherish it ), I'm just confused as to why a clearly Christian person is persistantly posting in a 'general religion chat' forum, and on topics about pantheism. Are you trying to 'save' us?
Please let me stress: I'm not saying 'each should stick to their own', far from it; I welcome input from anyone who has peace & love as priority one in their heart, I just don't get your angle.

Most importantly:


I, personally, don't see why Man has to impose his own personality onto God. Please, read through the bible stories and count how many times God is described as having human emotions (love, hate, regret - sheesh he even does a 180 on a lot of issues by the time of the New Testament), does this not sound like a human mind? Would not an Ultimate Intelligence be so far removed [above] from such petty feelings as to make such stories laughable?

Would the Master of the Universe really care if a human being said his 'name' in vain? or if they wore a piece of cloth around their head? bowed down and praised to Allah five times a day? Such matters would be insignificant to an all-loving-overlord, I say.

Nobody, huh?

Thank you, Redykeulous



Isn't it great to see proportions in action?
Education erodes unfounded faith (or ignorance), both in the individual and in the long term, bigger picture.

Oh Hades Yes

I think the biggest obstacle for people trying to understand Pantheism is the connotations that come with the word 'god'. Consider these two statements:

God is everything

&

Everything is god

The former allows one to include preconceived notions of what god is and since humans have been fighting over definitions since forever it's probably not a very useful statement.

The latter is much clearer, IMO. It is the definition.

s1owhand, why is it that whenever someone brings up the people of the old testament you respond as if they were speaking of modern day Jews? Of course a post will look like garbage if you don't read it properly.

this just blew my mind

Not according to the old testament.
The race of men who were chosen to have a covenant with God are continuously implied to be righteous. The 'no killing' rule is clearly meant to cover the circumcised only; one either accepts this stipulation or recognises the 'chosen people' as humongous hypocrites.