h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I've always thought there was something a tad rubgy-playerish about Thor to be honest.

* Tries to please Gif by updating his 'Front Page' *

>> So, will you come into the <<

The answer is 'yes', but it is my personal choice to drink tomato juice.
( The reason being in 'my journal' )

Gif

You quote me as saying:

The problem comes when people say that God directs undirected evolution,>
>Yeah, i start to have a problem with sentences like that!
>To try to explain that God is sovereignly directing a random process sounds ridiculous. So why do I still believe?!>

I actually said the following:




You have a creative cut and paste function on your computer!



You should find the answer in what I cut and pasted above!!

You say:

What? To believe that God created the universe and to believe in evolution and all the laws of physice and nature? I see the point you're making here, Gif, but I only said that I think it unwise to try to explain what is unexplainable. i.e. I didn't coin the sentence in question so I need not defend it! If God created the universe then it is a miraculous event in a similar way to a healing or resurrection would be. After verifying such an event with medical professionals one might persevere in trying to explain how it happened or one might rejoice that a miracle has occured.



Hmm, working for one's living is normal behaviour. One should not expect God to reward laziness. One thanks God that there was a harvest sufficient enough to sustain one's family through the winter months. One might thank God for strength to work. Remember George Mueller? He received answers to his prayers for food in a more remarkable way than is the norm for most of us.



So should I accept your personal testimony here!

<>Perhaps God is beyond such defining, Ed!
But if you can't even say what you mean by 'God', how can you possibly say whether or not you believe in it?>

Do I need to reiterate? The answer is to listen to Jesus' words. He teaches us what God is like without defining God in long complicated sentences. He teaches us using parables to explain the principles of the kingdom of heaven. He teaches that God is a loving Father who will answer prayer, who will forgive the repentant sinner, who knows every detail of our lives etc etc.



Again, let me try to say it more clearly. When it comes to responding to Jesus Christ its far more to do with abandoning foolish pride than attaining some unattainable intellectual concept. The bible clearly teaches that God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. It can be more difficult for some people to humble themselves than it is for them to understand what Jesus is saying.

mikey2

if god existed, pi would be exactly 3.

>>>>But if you can't even say what you mean by 'God', how can you possibly say whether or not you believe in it?>

Do I need to reiterate? The answer is to listen to Jesus' words. He teaches us what God is like without defining God in long complicated sentences. He teaches us using parables to explain the principles of the kingdom of heaven. He teaches that God is a loving Father who will answer prayer, who will forgive the repentant sinner, who knows every detail of our lives etc etc.



Again, let me try to say it more clearly. When it comes to responding to Jesus Christ its far more to do with abandoning foolish pride than attaining some unattainable intellectual concept. The bible clearly teaches that God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. It can be more difficult for some people to humble themselves than it is for them to understand what Jesus is saying.<<<<

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the common fallacy known as 'Begging the Question', aka circular reasoning or more formally as 'Petitio Principii'

Nicely defined here -- http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html

"Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.

1. Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
2. Claim C (the conclusion) is true.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true."

Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely subtle. "

.. and briefly explained here -- A688287

I wager that many bright children of 8 or so could understand this; most reasonably aware adults wouldn't view this as an 'unattainable intellectual concept'

~~~~

None of what you have said so far is, in my view, an honest attempt to answer the question: How can you choose to believe in something you cannot explain and clearly don't understand?'

It seems to me that most h2g2ers have a good academic education. ( Good )

But can you explain pleasure and pain ?

What has that evolved from ?

pain is a survival reaction

without pain a creature would not move away from danger and would die and not pass on its genes to the next generation

...aaaand in the absence of pleasure there would be little motivation to eat or reproduce

Of course,

You're both right, Taff & Taliesin

But, you didn't explain where they come from.
To just say "they are", is not very convincing, is it ?
Why are we here? Our souls? Our 'essences', if you like?
* pricks himself with a pin *
Ouch!

all the protazoa who didnt have rudimentry pain and pleasure died out millions of years ago

evolution in action

what have pain and pleasure survival reactions have to do with souls or essence???????

the soul is our feeling we have when the monkey in our brain tries to look through the back of his own head to see the bit that is thinking

'Why are we here? Our souls? Our 'essences', if you like?'


For the umpteenth damn time, what the Hell does 'soul' mean?



please see: A42586266



You've just asked the equivalent of 'where does my purple magical creature come from?' The origin of pain and pleasure were explained very clearly and concisely. Neither Taff nor Taliesin said 'They are.' without a subject compliment.


As for 'why are we here?' I've yet to see any evidence that there is a reason to ask that question. There is no indication that there is a 'purpose' to our existence independent from our own choices, and there is not a lot of evidence that we have any such thing as choice.

sorry Taff. simulpost. Thanks for the definition of 'soul'. That one works far better than any I've had from theists.

we are here because pan dimensional beings wish to known the answer to life the universe and everything and have constructed a computer the size of a planet to run their calculations, these creatures extrusions into our universe is that of mice, and we form part of the organic matrix of this computer

its all there in the good book

writen by the profit Douglas Adams and not some insane hermit living in the desert with bad hygine

all you have to do is belive

you know how to belive dont you????

I just found this news brief in the January issue of Scientific American: 'The Calvinists scored slightly but significantly lower than atheists did in correctly identifying whole images.' http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=news-scan-briefs-sounds-like-thunder in the bit titled 'Seeing on Faith'

Here's the full publication on the study: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003679

Seems the religious may not be seeing the big picture.

>> For the umpteenth damn time, what the Hell does 'soul' mean? <<

Haven't you got one?

How about conscience! You know, the 'bit' that thinks "I am, therefore I am!"

i refer you to 14032

'Haven't you got one?'

I have a brain, or rather, 'I' am a brain. 'I' am a brain doing what a brain does. What you call 'conscience' is one of the things a brain does.

What do you mean by 'soul'. Do you mean one of the things a brain does? Or do you mean some sort of thingum that can have an existence without a brain? If you mean the latter, I again refer you to A42586266

Please, when asked what you mean by a term, try to provide a coherent definition instead of new terms which may or may not have the same definition as the term in question. You've offered 'soul' 'essence' and now 'conscience'. More helpful would be a list of the physical properties of the object in question.


It would seem that 'soul' is, like 'god' an incoherency which can be used as a placeholder in actually meaningless sentences.

Hi Taff,

I spend most of my life, trying to get the monkey OUT of my brain.

See you in a couple of weeks, (my)God willing. Goodnight.