where i have to disagree about apes and humans being just like one another, is that i know man knows what he does to one another is wrong. in the back of his mind, he hears a little voice telling him he shouldn't but his compulsive behavoirs take over and he just does it. maybe for thrills, or maybe just because he can. i don't know how apes feel in the back of their minds that what they are doing is wrong, more that they do it for survival of their dna line. like when they kill off the young of the former leader. just like lions and many other animals do. man is different from animals. it just serves our own self interest to pretend we are just like them, then we can do whatever we want and not have to feel remorse, because hey, we're all just animals, right?!? and maybe i'm wrong, i've never been able to ask an animal what it thinks when it does what it does, so you never know. but i don't buy it. and a true christian loves his neighbors regardless of what they think or say about them. even the one who murders your family, hurts them in unimaginable ways, you should love him. as for what a true christian wants, is it selfish to want to help your fellow man, more than you want to help yourself? is it selfish to want to feed your fellow man, rather than gourge yourself with gluttonous behavior? is it selfish to want to protect your neighbor and his belongings just as much as you do your own? only when we want to truly serve and protect one another as much as we want to watch out for our own skin, will we ever begin to even move towards peace. as long as people are only out for themselves, you will always have someone trying to get over on someone else. and when jesus christ died for our sins, we were given a clean slate as far as our sins being paid for. so you don't really have to do anything, just believe. but i want more than that......and if you have another way that helps you get there, power to you. maybe someday you'll come to my aid when i need help, and in return someone will come to yours. but as for me, i believe in my God, and that he will help me become the man i know i could be, not the man i am right now. science may seem easier to prove because alot of the things are right there in front of you, and for the Bible, it happened thousands of years ago. and i wasn't there, and none of you were either. but the comfort, happiness and the inner peace i feel when i ask it from my God is real, and no science can ever take that away from me. and no pill or drug ever gave it to me. i believe the word and that if i try to follow it, my God will bless me. and not with material possessions which can be taken away at any moment, but with the spiritual possession that noone can ever take away from me. God bless!

Okay - this point makes more sense. I was merely responding to the question you brought up as to my post to Abra. Here - the example was his defining the God of the bible (one who's attributes can be understood - though not in their entirety)

It matters not the desire to analyse scripture, or even to believe it when it comes to stating what is understood about the biblical God. Any established premise would be drawn from the text when attempting to demonstrate a point.

As to your question - most answers are going to be subjective. If by "subset" - you mean is God in all things and are all things God, the answer to that being "yes" is not supported by the text.
The bible says that God created all things - and was able to stand apart from His creation - so given that as a textual obsevation, it would make God an entity "within" the universe, as you say. Though not confined by it. That is, the universe in all of it's expanse is not infinite - whereas, God is.

Abra - I said nothing about the validity of my premises, just that yours are unacceptable because you establish it on a Pretext and not a Context. The fact remains that the examples you sight might justify your conclusion of disbelief, but not that of God not existing.

If one disagree's with the concept of a death penalty, does that mean our justice system does not exist? This is what you are essentially saying.

Science has nothing to do with the conclusions you draw from scripture, so let's not veer off on that path.

God's "stupidity" as you put it, has more to do with your lack of reasoning and understanding to the context you are refering than it does to the God you have premised. (who I repeat - does not exist).

There seems to be a problem with your theory NoJoke.

You say that men and humans aren't like each other.

But are all men like each other?

Do you lust to do the things that Jeffery Dahmer did?

Would you love to be like Adolf Hitler?

Do you only refrain from doing these thing because a little voice in the back of your head is telling them that you are wrong.

Could you not decide for yourself that these things are wrong?

When you read the words of Jesus are you surprised by what he asks you do to, and not to do?

Do you think to yourself, "Damn! I would have never thought to behave that way on my own!"

I don't know what you are like as a person, but I've never been tempted to do any of the things that criminals do. In fact, my family (made up of devout Christians and even some ministers) used to sit around the campfire and ponder why it is that we aren't tempted by all the thing the Bible says that we should be tempted to do.

When I read the words of Jesus (which aren't really any different from the words of Buddha), I'm not the slightest bit surprised by what these men are asking people to do. I agree with everything they say!

How can I 'follow' Jesus when I already think like him?

It's pretty hard to follow someone who thinks that same way you do. Who's following and who's leading?

If there's a little voice in my head telling me that some things are wrong to do, it's probably coming from my own self.

I often wonder how many Christians can even think the way they do to be honest about it. They must lust to do some pretty bad stuff is all I can figure.

In fact, a fellow just made some posts in a thread on the forums today (I guess it was yesterday now). He was trying to make the point that life would be meaningless if there isn't life after death.

Somehow a believe in a gift of everlasting life seems to be enough to keep him in line. Without that carrot in front of his nose I guess we'd have another Jeffery Dahmer on our hands.

I think we should all chip in an buy the man a Bible if it will keep him in line.

These kinds of arguments just don't move me in the least. I've met far too many truly decent caring loving atheist to believe that men need to be bribed into being good.

I wouldn't need to change my lifestyle one iota if angels came to me and told me that Christ is on his way. Like I've already said, I'm in total agreement with what he preached. I'd welcome him with open arms as a brother who thinks the same way I do.

If he's as nice as me he'd give me a big hug too. After all, why should he be upset with me? Just because I refuse to appease the hypocritical "Cristians"?

It isn't about religion. It isn't about believing in Jesus. It about BEING LIKE JESUS! (or Buddha!) You can't be like one without being like the other.

Moreover, you need to be like either if you're already naturally like them. Then all you need to be is your SELF.

The idea that all men are evil and sinners, and criminals is total bull crap.

It simply isn't true. All you need to do is look around you to see that.

Neither are Monkeys 'criminals' for the most part and according to you they have no moral values. Yet they honor their social groups with about the same consistency as humans do!

There are good monkeys and bad monkeys, just ask anyone who has ever been around monkeys for very long!

They're just like people. They aren't really any different at all from a moral standpoint. About the only difference is that monkeys don't have the mental ability to create complicated premediated crimes. They don't use money so they aren't going to rob banks. But they do rob from each other! And they fight over it.

Just like human children.

The fact that humans have a brain that is capable of dealing with far more complex social situations is really the only thing that sets us apart.

I don't think we are morally any different from monkey. We're just capable of pulling off more complex premediated crimes.

But yet there are many people who have absolutely no desire to do anything 'wrong'. And many of those people are atheists.

To NoJoke,

By the way, there are things that the Bible claims is 'wrong' but there's no voice in the back of my head saying that it's wrong.

Having an intimate physical relationship out of wedlock for example.

I don't feel there is anything wrong with that, even though society has tried to ram that down my throat.

If there was a God who was the 'little' voice in the back of our minds telling us what's right and wrong then we all agree with what's right or wrong.

But we don't.

Therefore it can't be true that we are all being guided by the same 'voice' in the back of our minds.

It simply doesn't hold water.

Hey Redi;

I'm not sure that Abra and I could agree on a premise of who and what the God of Scripture is, as we've been tossing this about for close to a year now. However - that doesn't detract from noticing a conclusion based on a premise drawn from Pretext. Something I am quite sure Abra is familiar with. He doesn't need me teaching him about logic - just pointing it out when he abuses it. He is long past being motivated to drawing his conclusions about God from Context. I just don't see him sitting at home studying out all of the passages that refer to the "personality" of God. He is content with cherry picking his perceptions of Christianity, and I am content with refutting them. Our conversations are always enjoyable, else we wouldn't have them.

In all sincerity - I hope that our paths would cross one day, because I find him to be quite enjoyable, even though he is a bit trollish.
But your point is not lost - I will give it some thought and devise different approaches to his posts in order to at least bring about some different results. I could see where our discourse is getting a bit stale.

As long as we're running amok off-topic here... Did you see the special on Neanderthals on the discovery channel the other night? Facinating. The recent discoveries are demonstrating that the theory that Homo-sapeins are decendants of Neanderthal are becoming evident. There is a scientist in Branford Conn who's company is mapping out the genome of a presummed Neanderthol bone. Quite facinating show!

I disagree.

Besides you're beating a dead horse. The Bible can't be true Eljay.

The Bible claims that mankind is reponsible for bringing death and imperfection into the world.

But we know that death and imperfection have been around long before mankind ever even existed.

So the book is caught red-handed. It's a big fat lie.

The premise doesn't match reality.

Okay - where does it say in the text that man is responsible for bringing death and imperfection into the world?

That's the whole story of Adam and Even and original sin.

Why do you push this picture so hard?

Why are you so anxious to believe that you're the reason that God had to send his son to be butchered on a pole?

I'm not going to believe that on pure faith. That's asburd.

I'd need to have no other choice before I'd believe that story.

Why you want to believe such a terrible story based on nothing more than pure faith is beyond me.

I missed that show unfortunately but I just now looked up the program description on the Discovery Channel website and thought I better post this.This is what the show detailed so there is no confusion.


Genetic History Revealed


Aug. 7, 2008 -- DNA extracted from a 38,000-year-old Neanderthal bone has just enabled scientists to sequence the complete mitochondrial genome for the human-like species, according to a paper that will be published tomorrow in the journal Cell.

The remarkable feat, which has led to at least three major discoveries about the extinct stocky European individuals, represents a breakthrough for studies on the human family.

"This is the first complete mitochondrial genome sequence from an extinct hominid," lead author Richard Green explained to Discovery News.

Mitochondria, which an individual inherits from his or her mother, are cellular powerhouses that possess their own DNA and include 13 protein-coding genes. The researchers sequenced the Neanderthal mitochondria 35 times to ensure their findings were as accurate as possible.

After studying the newly completed genome, Green, a researcher at the Max-Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany, and his team first concluded that the Neanderthal mitochondria falls outside the range of variation found in humans today, offering no evidence that interbreeding occurred between them and us.

The researchers are quick to add that such interbreeding could still have happened and that the Neanderthals' "exact relationship with modern humans remains a topic of debate."

Clearer is the fact that Neanderthals and humans split from a common ancestor around 660,000 years ago. The researchers based this initially upon prior research that determined humans and chimpanzees diverged from each other six to eight million years ago.

They calculated mtDNA sequence changes for both humans and Neanderthals since that time. These accumulated changes then "let us calculate how long ago was the most recent common ancestor of humans and Neanderthals," Green said.

He added, "This common ancestor likely looked something like Homo erectus." This extinct hominid is believed to have been super strong with a relatively large head and brain.

What most surprised the scientists was how little purification acted upon the Neanderthal's DNA, meaning that the elimination of slightly deleterious alleles, or variant gene forms, didn't occur very often within the population.

I would urge anyone who is interested in this finding to look up the journal Cell articles about it. Fascinating.

Thank you Krimsa for clarifying!

You are saying that Humans know the difference between right and wrong, between good and evil. Hmmm wonder why no other living organism on the planet does?
You would think that Mother Nature would have given this ability to other animals wouldn’t you. Look at those odds - millions upon millions of life forms on earth and we are the only ones who know the difference between Good and Evil.

I read an explanation concerning good and evil once , some where...hmmm now where did I read that ?...Oh! That’s right the BIBLE explained it to me...not Darwin’s theory of evolution...

Whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.

Humans argue about what is good and evil all the time. Especially religious people who claim to follow the Bible.

Have you ever noticed how many different religions, sects, and denominations there are that are based on the Bible?

Very few of them will agree on what it ever says.

Is it wrong to kill? Christian soldiers don't seem to have a problem killing the enemy.

Even the Biblical God didn't seem to have any problem telling human to stone each other to death.

I don't believe the Bible has a clear idea of what's right or wrong.

"Religion has never really had a big problem with murder. More people have been killed in the name of god than for any other reason. All you have to do is look at Northern Ireland, Cashmire, the Inquisition, the Crusades, and the World Trade Center to see how seriously the religious folks take thou shalt not kill. The more devout they are, the more they see murder as being negotiable. It depends on who's doin the killin' and who's gettin' killed."

George Carlin

The term "evil" is mostly used within the confines of religious doctrine. Even animals have a sense of right and wrong.



Who is "mother nature?"



This is not an agreed upon premise. The idea of "Good and evil" is usually confined within religious doctrine. Last I checked, animals don't have religious doctrines.



So I guess if you had never read the Bible you would not know the difference between good and evil then.

I don't think the theory of evolution was intended to be about "good and evil." So what is your point?

I am not interested in the bible insomuch as it explain to me the difference between "good and evil." It is my personal opinion that you should be able to gauge this on your own, unless there is some kind of emotional or psychiatric problem that might compromise your ability to make these distinctions. Borderline personality disorder is one such affliction that can hinder a person's ability to navigate by use of their own moral compass. The common designation that we hear associated with this condition is "sociopath". A sociopath lacks the capability to demonstrate or emote empathy towards their fellow human beings.

SkyHook
Thanks for you stick 2 itivness and for your responces. Your answers always give me more to think about and that may be why I over extend the topics.




0.) non-physical does exist
1.) much of the non-physical is produced at the physical level and, seems to help maintain the structure required for the existence of the physical
2.) non-physical CAN be cause over physical

Hey Krimsa,
The info. you posted about Neanderthal is the same info in the magazine article. Aside from the fact that Neanderthal DNA shows no markers in modern humans, what I found interesting what that the short stocky stature was not so much stocky as it was muscular. So much muscle mass, even in the women found that a 5,000 calorie daily diet would have been required. That and the fact that their brain mass was larger makes us realize something about current day issures.

Mainly; when the fuel you need to run the engine costs more than the value of the energy it supplies, the engine is doomed to extinction.

If we consider the process of natural selection worth anything at all, then we should pay attention to the lessons we've created about how it works.

Nojoke


Mother Nature, decided to change human development for two obvious reasons. One being that the physical structure of the evolving model, up to Neanderthal,was too muscle intensive and the fuel it required was a hinderance and starvation became a struggle. So the species that survived was us.

One thing we needed in order to survive was the ability to live in packs - we call this, a society. However, our social graces were somewhat lacking and self awareness was required. Self awarness allowed us to understand the needs of the individual. Allowed us to understand the concept of past, present and future. Allowed us to understand that in our weak physical condition our only hope for survival was to create THE SOCIAL CONTRACT.

That is when we bagan to create the ethical principls on which to live peacefully, within a group.

So you see "nojoke", man is just an animal, and Mother nature, using a great tool called natural selection, has assured us a survival factor capable of surviving the extinction of almost every other living creature.

LUCK OF THE DRAW, I GUESS.