Comments on: deeper and deeper http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/ tales of life from North Queensland, Australia Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:51:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Cousin Tim. http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1327 Cousin Tim. Thu, 17 Mar 2005 08:49:10 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1327 Good Good

]]> By: tom http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1322 tom Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:33:49 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1322 of course we support <a href="http://www.htmlgoodies.com/primers/html/" rel="nofollow">html</a> of course we support html

]]> By: Cousin Tim. http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1314 Cousin Tim. Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:44:53 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1314 Re: the 'we are here and it is now' comment. In terms of empirical proof even that statement falls down. If you are a true rationalist you will realise that at some point in everyone's world view faith is involved. Don't believe me? If you have records of your checking that the floor is there EVERY morning before you put your feet on it to get out of bed then you still won't get anywhere close to proving me wrong on this point. Assuming you exist. Assuming _I_ Exist. Which brings me to my most important point: does this blog support HTML? Interestingly enough at around the point that you started this thread a bunch of my friends (a mate of mine and all of his friends from his Theology course!) started a discussion-by-email about cremation vs burial and the xtn view on it. Quelle coincidence? Re: the ‘we are here and it is now’ comment. In terms of empirical proof even that statement falls down. If you are a true rationalist you will realise that at some point in everyone’s world view faith is involved. Don’t believe me? If you have records of your checking that the floor is there EVERY morning before you put your feet on it to get out of bed then you still won’t get anywhere close to proving me wrong on this point. Assuming you exist. Assuming _I_ Exist.

Which brings me to my most important point: does this blog support HTML?

Interestingly enough at around the point that you started this thread a bunch of my friends (a mate of mine and all of his friends from his Theology course!) started a discussion-by-email about cremation vs burial and the xtn view on it. Quelle coincidence?

]]> By: tom http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1312 tom Wed, 16 Mar 2005 06:25:20 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1312 But he also states in his creed, "I believe that no discovery of fact, however trivial, can be wholly useless to the race". Seems like a contradictory, misogonist, bigoted, nutcase if you ask me. Although, I do like this one, "Democracy is the theory that holds that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." ahaha, so true... But he also states in his creed, “I believe that no discovery of fact, however trivial, can be wholly useless to the race”. Seems like a contradictory, misogonist, bigoted, nutcase if you ask me.

Although, I do like this one, “Democracy is the theory that holds that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” ahaha, so true…

]]> By: YLD http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1311 YLD Wed, 16 Mar 2005 03:18:07 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1311 http://www.io.com/~gibbonsb/mencken.html http://www.io.com/~gibbonsb/mencken.html

]]> By: YLD http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1310 YLD Wed, 16 Mar 2005 03:16:05 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1310 "We are here and it is now. Further than that, all human knowledge is moonshine" HL Mencken. “We are here and it is now. Further than that, all human knowledge is moonshine” HL Mencken.

]]> By: tom http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1308 tom Tue, 15 Mar 2005 23:38:42 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1308 timtim, yes Andy<em> is</em> the god of this page. ------ Lock, if you had said that a couple of thousand years ago, you would've been in serious trouble. In John 8:58 Jesus says "Before Abraham was born, I am!". Not only was he saying that he existed before Abraham, who lived some 1800 years before Jesus was born, but he was applying God's sacred Hebrew name ('Yahweh', meaning 'I am') to himself. The Jews knew what he was saying, because their outraged reaction was to try to stone him to death for blasphemy! (<a href="http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~carling/god&bb1.html" rel="nofollow">Poole 1994</a>) ------ Cousin Tim, thanks for your comment. Nice and well thought out, unlike some others (*see above*). Your bit about "fair-trade tea or coffee with fair trade sugar" is a classic, LMFAO. Here, 'fair trade' and sugar are <a href=http://www.amwu.asn.au/default.asp?action=LoadArticle&ID=1389%20">touchy subjects</a>, as the US and Australia just made a fair-trade agreement that controversially left sugar cane out of the equation - it was a big deal in North Queensland, where most of the sugar is produced. As for your statement re: the big bang, "For an explosion to happen there had to be something there". Well, matter and time were created at that point. As stated <a href="http://homepages.tcp.co.uk/~carling/god&bb1.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>, it wasn't a "cosmic explosion at a point in time in empty black space, but the beginning of space and of time itself (space-time)." Religion v. science: There <a href="http://www.cis.org.uk/" rel="nofollow">are</a>/were many scientists who belive in God. However, I think it's best summed up by the judge in the Simpsons who rules, "religion must stay 500 yards away from science at all times". :) timtim, yes Andy is the god of this page.

——

Lock, if you had said that a couple of thousand years ago, you would’ve been in serious trouble. In John 8:58 Jesus says “Before Abraham was born, I am!”.

Not only was he saying that he existed before Abraham, who lived some 1800 years before Jesus was born, but he was applying God’s sacred Hebrew name (’Yahweh’, meaning ‘I am’) to himself. The Jews knew what he was saying, because their outraged reaction was to try to stone him to death for blasphemy! (Poole 1994)

——

Cousin Tim, thanks for your comment. Nice and well thought out, unlike some others (*see above*). Your bit about “fair-trade tea or coffee with fair trade sugar” is a classic, LMFAO. Here, ‘fair trade’ and sugar are touchy subjects, as the US and Australia just made a fair-trade agreement that controversially left sugar cane out of the equation - it was a big deal in North Queensland, where most of the sugar is produced.

As for your statement re: the big bang, “For an explosion to happen there had to be something there”. Well, matter and time were created at that point. As stated here, it wasn’t a “cosmic explosion at a point in time in empty black space, but the beginning of space and of time itself (space-time).”

Religion v. science: There are/were many scientists who belive in God. However, I think it’s best summed up by the judge in the Simpsons who rules, “religion must stay 500 yards away from science at all times”.

:)

]]> By: lock http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1307 lock Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:26:45 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1307 I love. God is love. I am God. simple I love. God is love. I am God.

simple

]]> By: Dunc http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1306 Dunc Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:59:18 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1306 I am going to take this to Water Resources Engineering for 3 hours, comprised of not interesting water dynamics but the overall boring processes of the global water cycle. The point being, it will ensure much thinking to be achieved, not on engineering subjects, but Toms latest blog entry. Hmmmmmm....... I am going to take this to Water Resources Engineering for 3 hours, comprised of not interesting water dynamics but the overall boring processes of the global water cycle.
The point being, it will ensure much thinking to be achieved, not on engineering subjects, but Toms latest blog entry.

Hmmmmmm…….

]]> By: Cousin Tim. http://tomandzoe.com/log/2005/03/life-after-death/#comment-1304 Cousin Tim. Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:45:00 +0000 http://tomandzoe.com/log/?p=196#comment-1304 Re your comments on Anglicanism, Tom. The Anglican church is one of the denominations where it is easier to have practically any belief and still call yourself a 'Christian' - it's possible in any denomination but easier in certain Anglican churches. The Anglican church is very wide ranging in it's beliefs which is probably why the teaching came across as unfocused. Or maybe you just had bad teachers! There are some Anglican churches where Theology is important. There are other Anglican churches where regular Sunday attendance, wearing the right clothes and whether the head Alto in the Choir is in tune is far more important. This is because the Anglican church is a state church. That said there are 'Pew fillers' in a lot of churches - 'only here for beer' in a sense. Except it's not beer it's fair-trade tea or coffee with fair trade sugar or sweetners. As far as the big bang - if there was absolutely nothing there then where was the matter to make the explosion. "Nothing was there - then something happened" - that's not good science. For an explosion to happen there had to be something there - anti-matter, proteomatter something 'other' than the matter we have now, but not absolutely nothing. I'd agree that the idea of absolutely nothing is scary. Whether it is more or less scary to think of the chance that you could spend eternity in a very bad place or not is a whole other matter of discussion. Suffice to say that those who think Christianity is an easy option for people who don't want to face reality obviously hasn't read the Bible closely enough! I find it interesting that Humanists reject the Supernatural. They usually cite that it is scientific to do so. Which is strange because science is supposed to set forth theories not absolutes. You write a theory based in part on the evidence and then test it against all the evidence it can to see if it adds up. As the absolute empirical proof of an absolute higher power who is beyond human understanding is an impossibility by it's very nature and the absolute disproof falls under the same category it would be just as unscientific to negate a theory due to it's reliance on the existence of God as it would be to negate a theory due to it's reliance of the non-existence of God. My own view is what would be described as the Biblical view - reached after a long search in my early Twenties which started with the question "Am I just believing all this Christian stuff because my parents taught me to" progressed onto "Partly, yes" then to "I'd better look into lots of stuff to make sure this still makes sense" and finally back to where I am now which is as a Christian with a lot of knowledge about other beliefs - which I respect but don't credit (if you get my meaning). Got there before Dad did ;) Do you wish you never started this? Re your comments on Anglicanism, Tom. The Anglican church is one of the denominations where it is easier to have practically any belief and still call yourself a ‘Christian’ - it’s possible in any denomination but easier in certain Anglican churches. The Anglican church is very wide ranging in it’s beliefs which is probably why the teaching came across as unfocused. Or maybe you just had bad teachers! There are some Anglican churches where Theology is important. There are other Anglican churches where regular Sunday attendance, wearing the right clothes and whether the head Alto in the Choir is in tune is far more important. This is because the Anglican church is a state church. That said there are ‘Pew fillers’ in a lot of churches - ‘only here for beer’ in a sense. Except it’s not beer it’s fair-trade tea or coffee with fair trade sugar or sweetners.

As far as the big bang - if there was absolutely nothing there then where was the matter to make the explosion. “Nothing was there - then something happened” - that’s not good science. For an explosion to happen there had to be something there - anti-matter, proteomatter something ‘other’ than the matter we have now, but not absolutely nothing.

I’d agree that the idea of absolutely nothing is scary. Whether it is more or less scary to think of the chance that you could spend eternity in a very bad place or not is a whole other matter of discussion. Suffice to say that those who think Christianity is an easy option for people who don’t want to face reality obviously hasn’t read the Bible closely enough!

I find it interesting that Humanists reject the Supernatural. They usually cite that it is scientific to do so. Which is strange because science is supposed to set forth theories not absolutes. You write a theory based in part on the evidence and then test it against all the evidence it can to see if it adds up. As the absolute empirical proof of an absolute higher power who is beyond human understanding is an impossibility by it’s very nature and the absolute disproof falls under the same category it would be just as unscientific to negate a theory due to it’s reliance on the existence of God as it would be to negate a theory due to it’s reliance of the non-existence of God.

My own view is what would be described as the Biblical view - reached after a long search in my early Twenties which started with the question “Am I just believing all this Christian stuff because my parents taught me to” progressed onto “Partly, yes” then to “I’d better look into lots of stuff to make sure this still makes sense” and finally back to where I am now which is as a Christian with a lot of knowledge about other beliefs - which I respect but don’t credit (if you get my meaning).

Got there before Dad did ;)

Do you wish you never started this?

]]>