A question for an anti-Evolutionist

And it would, until a point at which it reflexes.

Really, it all depends on what exists outside of our Universe. If it's also void, and follows our physics, then we will reach entropy. If it is denser and has a tendency to congeal, we'll get a Big Crunch.

what evidence?

Hopefully mine doesnt.... I'm counting on God to do that



To Coy:
Take care Coy... got an appointment.... ((((hugs))))

This is the problem with humanism. It invariably leads to a kind of ethical Darwinism: there is no good or bad; anything is okay if you can get away with it.

There are a lot of really good ideas in the New Testament, but one of the greatest is the notion that we reap what we sow. This goes to the relationship with God, again. It's a solution: a formula for determining the proper behavior for manifesting a specific result. (It's also a repudiation of much of the Old Testament. The Israelites conquered and were conquered in turn. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall have peace.)

It's also general enough (once you extract its essence from its agricultural frame) that it might just trancend anthropomorphism. To be completely honest, I don't expect to survive death (though I am willing to be surprised!), but this principle (what goes around comes around) I know to be true; and I suspect you will disagree, because it is wholly spiritual and flies in the face of survival of the fittest.

But if we are going to do away with Christianity (and despite a current short-term resurgence I think that the fundamentalist forms at least will dissipate in direct proportion as the population shifts from rural to urban) and if we are going to continue to develop and refine our technolgy (particularly the many ingenious ways we have invented for killing large numbers of people at the same time), then we had better find some kind of spirituality to replace it: something which makes the Golden Rule into more than just the naive opinion of idealistic people who will eventually be ground to dust by the tide of evolution.

--Allie

I don't have any specific links to send you too, but I have read papers about experiments that indicate that there isn't enough mass in the Universe to overcome the expantion that we observe.

So unless the laws of nature suddenly change, the Universe will keep expanding forever.

"That implies that the Universe will last forever. What happens when all the stars have burned out and the Universe is dead? What do you do then?"

There are theories, at the moment, that matter/energy is continually and randomly created. Perhaps the universe will last forever and perhaps the stars will "reload".

Who knows. But what I *do* know is that anyone who is utterly convinced of the truth of how the universe (and beyond) works is delusional, and potentially dangerous.

"If you have a child doesnt your child have a choice to be evil or good?"

Good and evil are subjective concepts. Is it evil to commit suicide by jumping from a burning building? Or is it evil to stay in the building and burn? Or are both evil, as choosing either is the act of choosing to die?

If I had a child, and I (and the rest of society), told him/her "everything you could ever possibly do, ever, is evil" (sounds Catholic, doesn't it?) is it then his/her fault if he/she is evil?

"If your child chooses to be a mass murderer does that make you a mass murderer as well?"

It means you are guilty of creating a being that has the potential to be a mass murder. This is true, as every child has that potential, but we don't blame the parents for exactly that reason. But surely God, supreme powerful and wise being that you believe him to be, holds the ultimate responsibility? If someone has the power to intervene to prevent an evil act, but doesn't, does that not make them evil too?

I would certainly consider a man to be evil if he stands by and does nothing while another man is murdered in front of him. So by my subjective idea of good and evil, how can God be anything other than evil?

"On the contrary... I have given a great deal of thought to what i believe. It's just that you don't agree with those thoughts"

I've pointed out a paradox in your thinking (that everything was created by God, yet man is responsibile for creating imperfect things, therefore if some things were created by man, not all things can be created by God), but you haven't responded to that paradox with an explanation. This suggests, to me, that you either have not thought on the subject enough to realise the paradox, or you didn't understand/care to respond to/read what I said.

Musuko.

Thankfully, all the positive aspects of the New Testament also appear in nearly every other religion in some form or another, and enough secular literature and morality includes similar concepts to ensure these values pervade humanity long after the death of any originating belief system.

You might want to read something a bit more current than 1917.

Wishful thinking won't change reality.

the math principles haven't changed and I have read more current information and from what I've read nobody can say definitively either way.

it can actually

I wish that were true.

This is something I've never understood about religious people, but at the same time explains a lot that's wrong with the world.

What's wrong with taking responsibility for your own actions? Why has God got to make the world a better place? Why don't us useless, imperfect humans do it ourselves?

Or:

1. God is not all powerful, but
   
2. God knows everything, and
   
3. God is all good.
   

My concept of "god" is an entity that knows all our anguish, who has empathy with it and can give us comfort, but cannot necessarily make it go away. That said, I can't conceive of "god" in the traditional terms. To me, it's more an energy, or an invisible web that binds us all together.

Yes, evil is good. Evil is what allows us a choice. Evil is the steel upon which we sharpen our swords.

http://www.sciencenews.org/pages/sn_arc98/12_19_98/bob1.htm

It's a long article so I will quote part of it here:

Freewill is an illusion. You don't choose anything.

Highly offensive and highly ignorant in one. Good Job!

This {the first paragraph} is one of the most pervasive Mainstream Christian/theist lies I've seen about rationalism/humanism, and it is bullshit. Humans are capable of creating their own moral systems without reference to an authoritative entity, and those systems are not "morally relative".

One example is, in fact, the Rule of Law in the United States of America. Our society is built on the balance of the natural rights of individuals (what they would be able/free to do if there was no-one else around) with the needs of the society they choose to participate in (refraining from actions that destroy/hobble the society or prevent others from enjoying the benefits of society).

I can be ethical and moral without a supernatural reward or supernatural punishment being threatened - I will participate in society because it benefits others and myself, and I will refuse to let society take away fundamental rights without a clear and present requirement - because it harms myself and others.

No-one uses 'survival of the fittest' and 'darwinism' as catchphrases anymore unless they're trying to equivocate rationalists/humanists/secular society with Nazi Germany - way to go there, too! I wish I had a nickel for every time someone misused 'survival of the fittest' and 'darwinism'.

Those who want Christianity to be overcome, do so because reliance on an imaginary authority with vague and apocryphal and dysfunctional laws harms societies and individuals, and can be asserted and implemented in such a way that it invites and encourages abuses of the natural rights of humans - up to and including hijacking secular governments, raiding treasury coffers, child abuse, and a host of other human rights abuses.

I'm atheist - I have no 'spirituality' as you likely conceive of it. I do have a religion, though - and no, that's not a contradiction nor is it a typo. It has everything to do with my morality, and my morality has nothing to do with supernaturalism, spirits, or other apocryphal notions. Am I humanist? Yes. That's not my religion. I like secular governments, especially ones that don't exclude a particular religious or philosophical belief by design.

You sure?

As sure as I can be about anything.

even I can see the fallacy in that evidence. Explosions like supernova's dim over time. I didn't see that mentioned in that article. They are like lightbulbs that gradually lose their luminescence as they burn.

then you are wrong about alot of things

If an insane person's brain chemistry is controlling their actions, why isn't a sane person's brain chemistry controlling their's?

Where does the difference come from?

your assuming I think there such a thing as insanity. Insanity is the result of people too lazy to adapt themselves to their body functions.

A person can adapt beyond brain chemistry flaws like you mentioned, look at all the ADD people who function without the aid of drugs