Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-21-2019 7:19 AM
26 online now:
PaulK, RAZD (2 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume:
Total: 861,868 Year: 16,904/19,786 Month: 1,029/2,598 Week: 275/251 Day: 3/43 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
345Next
Author Topic:   The Evolution of God (Before Genesis 1:1)
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 16 of 73 (445001)
12-31-2007 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by jar
12-31-2007 6:43 PM


quote:
No, actually the Bb.

What is BB? sorry quite new.

quote:
Ah, no, energy is not another word for spirit.

Sorry, but i think in most bibles the word "ruach" (hebrew or greek word--not sure) or spirit has been translated also as "power". If you accept that "power" and "energy" are same, then it could make sense.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 12-31-2007 6:43 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 12-31-2007 7:11 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 31281
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 17 of 73 (445003)
12-31-2007 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by NOT JULIUS
12-31-2007 6:53 PM


BB= Big Bang. A theory put forth by Father Georges Henri Joseph Éduard Lemaître, a priest.

If you accept that "power" and "energy" are same, then it could make sense.

No, of course I don't accept that. And no, "spirit" is not the same as "power"

So other than absolutely none of you assertions being correct, what do you have?


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by NOT JULIUS, posted 12-31-2007 6:53 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by NOT JULIUS, posted 12-31-2007 9:15 PM jar has responded

  
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 18 of 73 (445017)
12-31-2007 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
12-31-2007 7:11 PM


My reference is Bible in Today's English, 1966 (?)Catholic edition. Genesis 1:1,says, in the beginning...the earth was desolate...the raging ocean that covered everything was engulfed in total darkness, and the POWER of God was moving over the water. ( Footnote reads the POWER of God, or the SPIRIT of God, or awesome wind ).

You may not agree, but the bible says that SPIRIT = POWER. I think it may help if we mentally picture a "man"--that instead of being made of flesh and blood--is made up of electrical, nuclear, and all forms of power ( or energies). He is alive,has will, and can use these powers in any way he wants.

Edited by Great J, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 12-31-2007 7:11 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 12-31-2007 9:33 PM NOT JULIUS has responded
 Message 20 by nwr, posted 12-31-2007 9:41 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 31281
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 19 of 73 (445020)
12-31-2007 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by NOT JULIUS
12-31-2007 9:15 PM


If that is the case, and POWER=Energy, what does that have to do with God?

If you are then saying Power = God then you have reduced god to nothing but another force like electricity for man to use and control.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by NOT JULIUS, posted 12-31-2007 9:15 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 8:49 AM jar has responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 20 of 73 (445021)
12-31-2007 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by NOT JULIUS
12-31-2007 9:15 PM


Power is not energy. Rather, it is the rate of energy use (or production). The scientific meaning of "power" is different from the common language meaning of "power". You seem to be confusing the two.

A murderer uses energy when he shoots his victims. A robber uses energy to power his getaway car. It seems to me that your thesis makes God an accomplice to all crimes. I would have thought that blasphemous.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by NOT JULIUS, posted 12-31-2007 9:15 PM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 8:58 AM nwr has responded
 Message 26 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:14 AM nwr has responded

  
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 21 of 73 (445106)
01-01-2008 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
12-31-2007 9:33 PM


quote:
If you are then saying Power = God then you have reduced god to nothing but another force like electricity for man to use and control.

Not just another force. I think I have conveyed the idea of God--unlike men made of flesh and blood--evolved from all sorts of energy. "It" evolved into a "he". He can use all these powers to his will. His will is independent with that of men.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 12-31-2007 9:33 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 01-01-2008 9:03 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 22 of 73 (445108)
01-01-2008 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by nwr
12-31-2007 9:41 PM


quote:
Power is not energy. Rather, it is the rate of energy use (or production). The scientific meaning of "power" is different from the common language meaning of "power". You seem to be confusing the two.

This is why I requested this topic not to be posted in the science forum. Is the idea of electrical energy = electrical power not understandable to you? What about solar power = solar energy? In the minds of many God is not science, and the Bible is not a science book. Do you agree?

Edited by Great J, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by nwr, posted 12-31-2007 9:41 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by nwr, posted 01-01-2008 9:10 AM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 31281
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 23 of 73 (445110)
01-01-2008 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by NOT JULIUS
01-01-2008 8:49 AM


Then God is not the Power and so your assertion is falsified.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 8:49 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:12 AM jar has responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 24 of 73 (445113)
01-01-2008 9:10 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by NOT JULIUS
01-01-2008 8:58 AM


Is the idea of electrical energy = electrical power not understandable to you?

Completely understandable, and false.

What about solar power = solar energy?

Also false.

In the minds of many God is not science, and the Bible is not a science book. Do you agree?

That, I agree with.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 8:58 AM NOT JULIUS has not yet responded

  
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 25 of 73 (445115)
01-01-2008 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by jar
01-01-2008 9:03 AM


quote:
Then God is not the Power and so your assertion is falsified

Sorry, I failed to get your point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by jar, posted 01-01-2008 9:03 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by jar, posted 01-01-2008 9:16 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 26 of 73 (445117)
01-01-2008 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by nwr
12-31-2007 9:41 PM


quote:
A murderer uses energy when he shoots his victims. A robber uses energy to power his getaway car. It seems to me that your thesis makes God an accomplice to all crimes. I would have thought that blasphemous.

A tinsmith makes knives. Murderers use knife to kill. Therefore, a tinsmith is accomplice to the crime?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by nwr, posted 12-31-2007 9:41 PM nwr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 01-01-2008 9:31 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 31281
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 27 of 73 (445119)
01-01-2008 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by NOT JULIUS
01-01-2008 9:12 AM


If God is using the various forces then God is NOT the various forces.

If we can explain the various forces without resorting to God then there is no need for inserting God.

If we can explain what is seen through natural means then there is no need to insert God.

One last step.

In science, if something cannot be explained, the answer is "That can not be explained yet", not "GodDidIt."


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:12 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:38 AM jar has responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5586
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 28 of 73 (445127)
01-01-2008 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by NOT JULIUS
01-01-2008 9:14 AM


A tinsmith makes knives. Murderers use knife to kill. Therefore, a tinsmith is accomplice to the crime?

That's an entirely different situation. The tinsmith is not the knife, and the tinsmith is not a participant in the crime.

If God is energy, as you claim, then God is a participant in the crime.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:14 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:54 AM nwr has responded

  
NOT JULIUS
Member (Idle past 2734 days)
Posts: 219
From: Rome
Joined: 11-29-2006


Message 29 of 73 (445129)
01-01-2008 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by jar
01-01-2008 9:16 AM


quote:
If God is using the various forces then God is NOT the various forces.

Why should that be exclusive and not inclusive?

quote:
If we can explain the various forces without resorting to God then there is no need for inserting God.

Why should there be "blinders" or "blinkers"? In the 60s to 70s--not sure of the time frame--the atoms were considered as the smallest particle. Then whoaa! Different kinds of sub-atomic particles.

quote:
If we can explain what is seen through natural means then there is no need to insert God.

Why only "natural means"? I thought "nature" could be improved.

quote:
In science, if something cannot be explained, the answer is "That can not be explained yet", not "GodDidIt."

The key words are "that can not be explained yet". Is it possible then that the nature of God could later on be explained by science--starting from the "theory", "hypothesis", "guess" of this humble post?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by jar, posted 01-01-2008 9:16 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 01-01-2008 9:47 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 31281
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 30 of 73 (445132)
01-01-2008 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by NOT JULIUS
01-01-2008 9:38 AM


Why should that be exclusive and not inclusive?

You made it exclusive when you said God used the forces.

Why should there be "blinders" or "blinkers"? In the 60s to 70s--not sure of the time frame--the atoms were considered as the smallest particle. Then whoaa! Different kinds of sub-atomic particles.

There are no blinders or blinkers. I said:

jar writes:

If we can explain the various forces without resorting to God then there is no need for inserting God.

No blinders there.

Why only "natural means"? I thought "nature" could be improved.

Nature can be improved by natural means. What other means are there? Unnatural?

The key words are "that can not be explained yet". Is it possible then that the nature of God could later on be explained by science--starting from the "theory", "hypothesis", "guess" of this humble post?

Yes, the key words are "that can not be explained yet" and yes it is possible "that the nature of God could later on be explained by science", however, if that is the case then God is not supernatural but instead just another thing like slime and mud.


Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 9:38 AM NOT JULIUS has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by NOT JULIUS, posted 01-01-2008 10:12 AM jar has responded

  
Prev1
2
345Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019