Can you handle the Truth?

Originally posted by fini
Being WEak of mind says NOTHING about your brain power.

OH come on man, DO we have to explain everything we say to you, while you say nothing USEFUL ever??????????????

And dude, you are PREACHING, preaching to everyone, even to the binary code. .................. poor binary code.

And god loves everyone. God loves everyone in only ONE way............. AND THAT IS THE WAY WE SAY GOD SHOULD LOVE US.......... not a christian way, not a hindu way, not a Bahai way.............. JUST THE WAY we believe IT should.

but of course such logic is beyond your closed mind to HANDLE

Can you handle THAT??

Fini, why are you so bitter? Would you like to receive Christ as your Lord and Savior?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Fini, why are you so bitter? Would you like to receive Christ as your Lord and Savior?

So, you don't preach? 🙄

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Why do people get offended when you tell them the truth as it pertains to the Bible?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Fini, why are you so bitter? Would you like to receive Christ as your Lord and Savior?

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Yes, that is not life coming from non-life. That is Life coming from prior Life babe 😉

In the case of evolution you are correct. However, with regard to the Big Bang Theory you would be incorrect. According to the Big Bang Theory the universe purportedly came into existence from a sudden, random, chance, atomic, explosion of dense, hot, matter--which is admittedly non-organic or non-living (i.e. non-life). And through the (highly improbable) Primordial Soup Theory emerged the first cell from amino acids.

😎

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
In the case of evolution you are correct. However, with regard to the Big Bang Theory you would be incorrect. According to the Big Bang Theory the universe [B]purportedly came into existence from a sudden, random, chance, atomic, explosion of dense, hot, matter--which is admittedly non-organic or non-living (i.e. non-life). And through the (highly improbable) Primordial Soup Theory emerged the first cell from amino acids.

😎 [/B]

Yes, but you are isolating the Big Bang Theory from the Big Crunch Theory.

According to the Theory of the Big Crunch, the Universe will collapse on itself, slowly, but inevitably. This mass of energy will cause another Big Bang, which will birth another universe, then collapse again causing another big crunch, and so on...

I beleive in a Cycle of Birth and Rebirth. Not just because I am Buddhist, but I have beleived this long before. IT was the only thing that made any real sense to me.

If you think of the Universe, Time and Space, as linear, then yes it would be confusing to understand that life emerged from non life. But I think of the Universe, Time and Space, as a circle. No beginning, No End. Just a series of beginnings and endings.

Microscopic life can form into multicellular life...this much is proven.

But that would leave the question..where does microscopic life come from ?

Well, according to Buddhism, our being is composed of the Five Aggregates, one of them being conciousness....in the long run, Life is not that different from non life. Living and Non Living bodies are all composed of the same matter and all contain energy. The difference is Living Beings possess sentience, while others do not.

Anyways, it's a long explanation, and If you would like to hear it, I'd be glad to tell you. I am happy you responded to me with this post, because you actually challenged me, and invited me to challenge you....but when I say challenge, I don't mean as in antagonize or enforce...you stated a fact, and an intelligent conclusion out of your own knowledge (not someone else's) and gave me the way to respond in the same manner. 👆

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
In the case of evolution you are correct. However, with regard to the Big Bang Theory you would be incorrect. According to the Big Bang Theory the universe [B]purportedly came into existence from a sudden, random, chance, atomic, explosion of dense, hot, matter--which is admittedly non-organic or non-living (i.e. non-life). And through the (highly improbable) Primordial Soup Theory emerged the first cell from amino acids.

😎 [/B]

The Big Bang theory does not says that the universe came from chance. We don´t know the cause. Even if we knew, there would be still some things that could be interpreted in many ways.

About life, I think we must understand it better. We can´t say that there was no life before, unless life for you is only biological life. But if you are trying to give a spiritual background for existence you could easily say that life did not existed in the biological form. Some religions think like that and remain compatible with science.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
The Big Bang theory does not says that the universe came from chance. We don´t know the cause. Even if we knew, there would be still some things that could be interpreted in many ways.

About life, I think we must understand it better. We can´t say that there was no life before, unless life for you is only biological life. But if you are trying to give a spiritual background for existence you could easily say that life did not existed in the biological form. Some religions think like that and remain compatible with science.

Originally posted by Regret
I think it is amusing when people state that science believes in "chance" in the traditional sense of the word. Chance is a term that, when used by a proper scientist, refers to an event beyond our current level of understanding, or in reference to probability. Everything is governed by laws and there is no "chance", there is merely our lack of full understanding of the laws that govern all aspects of the occurrence being spoken of. The "big bang" did not occur by chance, "evolution" and "life" did not occur by chance, they occurred through laws.

Hey! Goddess Kali, read this. 💃

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Hey! Goddess Kali, read this. 💃

I understand what he is saying, but I think you misunderstand the definition I have used for the word chance, even though I explained it a hundred times.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I understand what he is saying, but I think you misunderstand the definition I have used for the word chance, even though I explained it a hundred times.

I understood; it's just that you are talking about abstractions based on the lack of information (the real world from our point of view), and I was talking Buddhist theory.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I understood; it's just that you are talking about abstractions based on the lack of information (the real world from our point of view), and I was talking Buddhist theory.

Chance is not the same as an accident...many things just happen. Not without cause, but without purpose and justification.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Chance is not the same as an accident...many things just happen. Not without cause, but without purpose and justification.

It's the way you say it. "Just happens" means with no cause to me. 😄

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Chance is not the same as an accident...many things just happen. Not without cause, but without purpose and justification.

Originally posted by Regret
This is inaccurate I think. The purpose of anything is to fulfill the dictates of the law that predicates it. It is justified by the law that brought it into existence. When religious people speak of these things they also grant them more meaning than they actually have, improperly attacking science with improper terminology and understanding. Everything in nature has purpose and justification, and nothing occurs by chance, at least in science.

...and in Buddhism. 😉

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
...and in Buddhism. 😉

LOL, me bitter???
I think you've said this before and I've addressed it before.

LOL i chuckled when he said to accept jesus as a saviour. LOL glad to know I wasn't the only one who thought it was funny.

THE only thing I accept Jesus as, is THE MOST RECENT INCARNATION of god......... so he's in the SAME realm as Krishna, Buddha, Ram, Shiva TO ME.

Originally posted by Regret
This is inaccurate I think. The purpose of anything is to fulfill the dictates of the law that predicates it. It is justified by the law that brought it into existence. When religious people speak of these things they also grant them more meaning than they actually have, improperly attacking science with improper terminology and understanding. Everything in nature has purpose and justification, and nothing occurs by chance, at least in science.

I am talking about when "good" or "bad" things happen. People say life is unfair, but that is simply a perspective. People are hurt, not because they deserve it, or because they brought the suffering/tragedy upon themselves, but because things happen without our permission...and our suffering is due to the lack of ability to accept the event.

You don't truly know if everything in Nature has a purpose or justification. That is simply how you see it based on observation. A meteor hits the Earth, or any other planet, and wipes out all life. What was the purpose ? What was the justification ?

The cause is quite clear, the meteor and Earth crossed paths. But where is the purpose ? Where is the justification ? They're may be none. Their might not even be a point...it just happened.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It's the way you say it. "Just happens" means with no cause to me. 😄

Everything happens through a cause. I never said otherwise, and you are either continuing to misunderstand my words, or you are purposely defining my point to your own terms in effort to best this debate.

I take it it's the former...when I say "just happens", i mean an event happens without purpose or justification. Nature does not need our permission to act..it does on its own. Purpose and justification are terms that WE attribute to what we see, just like when we attribute chance to uncertainty.

Originally posted by Regret
I think it is amusing when people state that science believes in "chance" in the traditional sense of the word. Chance is a term that, when used by a proper scientist, refers to an event beyond our current level of understanding, or in reference to probability. Everything is governed by laws and there is no "chance", there is merely our lack of full understanding of the laws that govern all aspects of the occurrence being spoken of. The "big bang" did not occur by chance, "evolution" and "life" did not occur by chance, they occurred through laws.

What is your definition of "law" with respect to your post?