Zone1 Do most Jews believe they killed Jesus?

[alang1216]

Ummmm... the only religion that claims to be a revealed religion?

Is there any religion that wasn't 'revealed' to us? Most recently Islam and Mormonism.

Geneis Chapter 1? Jesus Christ?

I don't see how either are at all convincing. Jesus lived and died a Jew, not a Christian.

It's hard to believe that someone who is the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence doesn't believe in miracles.

You have to believe in miracles BEFORE you can believe that we are the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence.

You are debating something you don't believe exists for starters. You don't see me debating atheism. I get my peace through the storms of life knowing that good comes from bad. That's my faith. How do you do it? Since I'm wrong and all.

I accept the world as it is, not as I'd wish it to be, and that world contains lots of misconceptions. I feel obligated to share what wisdom I've gotten over the years.

 

[ding]

Is there any religion that wasn't 'revealed' to us? Most recently Islam and Mormonism.

Clearly you don't know what a revealed religion is.

I don't see how either are at all convincing. Jesus lived and died a Jew, not a Christian.

Like I said before there's nothing you will accept because of your unreasonable perception of God.

You have to believe in miracles BEFORE you can believe that we are the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence.

How are we NOT products of a universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence?

I accept the world as it is, not as I'd wish it to be, and that world contains lots of misconceptions. I feel obligated to share what wisdom I've gotten over the years.

That's almost as dumb as you believing we are NOT products of the universe.

 

[alang1216]

Clearly you don't know what a revealed religion is.

Hey, I can Google. An interesting point since you claim your faith is based on logic and reason.

Like I said before there's nothing you will accept because of your unreasonable perception of God.

You mean that my perception is unreasonable since it is different than yours?

How are we NOT products of a universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence?

If you think that is the ONLY option, you need to take your blinders off.

That's almost as dumb as you believing we are NOT products of the universe.

That I never said.

 

[irosie91]

We still talking about Jesus as an apocalyptic Jew? My interpretation is that the oral histories of the NT were gathered and written down decades after Jesus died. After that, they were copied and recopied. Are those the copies you mean? Do you include the Gospels of Thomas and Peter and others that didn't make it into the cannon? ........................................................................................................

Fret not, Breezie has the originals. He even has the special document --called Q that

includes the original, onsite footage

 

[BreezeWood]

includes the original, onsite footage

- or, their lack of evidence is evidence of their forgeries and fallacies ...

not so the spiritual, evolution is the physical evidence of the heavenly metaphysical origin of living beings on planet earth.

captured in time the transformation of one metaphysical physiological being into another by the spiritual content that leaves one and joins the other.

 

[surada]

includes the original, onsite footage

Meet Jacob Herzog, Saudi Arabia's self-proclaimed chief rabbi

Rabbi Herzog, a 46-year-old American-Israeli rabbi who made aliyah from the US as a child, thought of traveling to Saudi Arabia only four years ago.

m.jpost.com

 

[ding]

Hey, I can Google. An interesting point since you claim your faith is based on logic and reason.

My faith that good comes from bad is based upon on logic and reason. You asked me about the connection to a God of the Bible. Can you please stop trying to intentionally muddy the water?

You mean that my perception is unreasonable since it is different than yours?

You have no perception of God which is why it's unreasonable for you to expect to find something you can't begin to perceive. Of course you could prove me wrong by stating your perception of God.

If you think that is the ONLY option, you need to take your blinders off.

Please feel free to list the other options that you believe exist.

That I never said.

You said,

You have to believe in miracles BEFORE you can believe that we are the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence.

Why would anyone have to believe in miracles to believe we are the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence. It's just science. So if one has to believe in miracles BEFORE one can believe that he is the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence AND one has already stated he doesn't believe in miracles THEN one can't believe that he is the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence. It's just simple deductive reasoning.

 

[alang1216]

My faith that good comes from bad is based upon on logic and reason. You asked me about the connection to a God of the Bible. Can you please stop trying to intentionally muddy the water?

As I recall you claimed there is only one 'revealed religion' so I think you brought a God into this.

You have no perception of God which is why it's unreasonable for you to expect to find something you can't begin to perceive. Of course you could prove me wrong by stating your perception of God.

OK here goes but I'll state up front, if you say I'm wrong I probably won't accept it.

God evolved like everything else in the universe. Man attempted to understand and control nature, mainly death and disease, and developed ritual practices that were likely, at least marginally, effective. These rituals were passed down with stories of why and how they worked. Eventually 'nature' became the image of men with powers and understandings superior to all others that the rituals call upon. Every group had their supernatural beings and it was accepted that there were many gods. One group in the Middle East decided that they would worship only one of the many gods. Christians took that belief one step further and claimed there was only one God.

Please feel free to list the other options that you believe exist.

Random chance? I'm willing to admit I don't know the answer but that doesn't mean I accept that you do.

Why would anyone have to believe in miracles to believe we are the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence. It's just science. So if one has to believe in miracles BEFORE one can believe that he is the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence AND one has already stated he doesn't believe in miracles THEN one can't believe that he is the product of the universe popping into existence being hardwired to produce intelligence. It's just simple deductive reasoning.

We know exactly one universe and it has taken us billions of years.

 

[ding]

As I recall you claimed there is only one 'revealed religion' so I think you brought a God into this.

In response to...

I heard your 'reason' for intelligent life in the universe but I never heard any connection to a God of the Bible.

Then you tried to link that to faith and reason to further muddy the water. So, no. I didn't bring God into it. You did.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK here goes but I'll state up front, if you say I'm wrong I probably won't accept it.

God evolved like everything else in the universe. Man attempted to understand and control nature, mainly death and disease, and developed ritual practices that were likely, at least marginally, effective. These rituals were passed down with stories of why and how they worked. Eventually 'nature' became the image of men with powers and understandings superior to all others that the rituals call upon. Every group had their supernatural beings and it was accepted that there were many gods. One group in the Middle East decided that they would worship only one of the many gods. Christians took that belief one step further and claimed there was only one God.

How about if I said you literally just proved my point? Apparently your perception of God is that God is made up. That's not a perception of God. That's you skipping steps. You literally have no perception of God that you can discover. So you never actually looked. That's like you saying you looked for a car key without having an idea of what a key or a car is.

Random chance? I'm willing to admit I don't know the answer but that doesn't mean I accept that you do.

Are the structures of atoms random? How about the charges of protons and electrons? How about the universe being created with nearly equal amounts of matter and anti-matter? Or unlike nearly every other substance, water expanding right before it freezes? Are these random?

There is nothing random about life and intelligence arising. Or do you disagree with the theory of evolution which is that evolution isn't random. Evolution occurs for logical reasons.

Do you have any evidence at all that intelligence arising was random chance?

We know exactly one universe and it has taken us billions of years.

"There is good reason to believe that we are in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. How many such places are there? Arthur Eddington, the great British physicist, gave us a formula: one hundred billion stars make a galaxy, and one hundred billion galaxies make a universe. The lowest estimate I have ever seen of the fraction of them that might possess a planet that could support life is one percent. That means one billion such places in our home galaxy, the Milky Way; and with about one billion such galaxies within reach of our telescopes, the already observed universe should contain at least one billion billion -- 1018 -- places that can support life

So we can take this to be a universe that breeds life; and yet, were any one of a considerable number of physical properties of our universe other than it is -- some of those properties basic, others seeming trivial, almost accidental -- that life, that now appears to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere..."

"...A few years ago it occurred to me -- albeit with some shock to my scientific sensibilities -- that my two problems, that of a life‑breeding universe, and that of consciousness that can neither be identified nor located, might be brought together. That would be with the thought that mind, rather than being a late development in the evolution of organisms, had existed always: that this is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so..."

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

 

[alang1216]

In response to...

Then you tried to link that to faith and reason to further muddy the water. So, no. I didn't bring God into it. You did.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was a point from one of our memorable, at least to me, discussions. Sorry to bring God into the Religion and Ethics thread.

How about if I said you literally just proved my point? Apparently your perception of God is that God is made up. That's not a perception of God. That's you skipping steps. You literally have no perception of God that you can discover. So you never actually looked. That's like you saying you looked for a car key without having an idea of what a key or a car is.

So I have to believe in God to believe in God? Circular reasoning at its' best. Why would anyone even look for a car key if they had no idea of what a key or a car is? That is a dangerous path because if you look hard enough for something you'll probably find it, be it God, ghosts, Big Foot, Elvis, conspiracy, or fraud.

Are the structures of atoms random? How about the charges of protons and electrons? How about the universe being created with nearly equal amounts of matter and anti-matter? Or unlike nearly every other substance, water expanding right before it freezes? Are these random?

Had to say since we have only one universe to observe. Is there a control?

There is nothing random about life and intelligence arising. Or do you disagree with the theory of evolution which is that evolution isn't random. Evolution occurs for logical reasons.

If there were no randomness to evolution we'd be dinosaurs.

Do you have any evidence at all that intelligence arising was random chance?

Was there intelligent life before man? Will there be intelligent life after man?

"There is good reason to believe that we are in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. How many such places are there? Arthur Eddington, the great British physicist, gave us a formula: one hundred billion stars make a galaxy, and one hundred billion galaxies make a universe. The lowest estimate I have ever seen of the fraction of them that might possess a planet that could support life is one percent. That means one billion such places in our home galaxy, the Milky Way; and with about one billion such galaxies within reach of our telescopes, the already observed universe should contain at least one billion billion -- 1018 -- places that can support life

So we can take this to be a universe that breeds life; and yet, were any one of a considerable number of physical properties of our universe other than it is -- some of those properties basic, others seeming trivial, almost accidental -- that life, that now appears to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere..."

"...A few years ago it occurred to me -- albeit with some shock to my scientific sensibilities -- that my two problems, that of a life‑breeding universe, and that of consciousness that can neither be identified nor located, might be brought together. That would be with the thought that mind, rather than being a late development in the evolution of organisms, had existed always: that this is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so..."

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

 

[alang1216]

"There is good reason to believe that we are in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. How many such places are there? Arthur Eddington, the great British physicist, gave us a formula: one hundred billion stars make a galaxy, and one hundred billion galaxies make a universe. The lowest estimate I have ever seen of the fraction of them that might possess a planet that could support life is one percent. That means one billion such places in our home galaxy, the Milky Way; and with about one billion such galaxies within reach of our telescopes, the already observed universe should contain at least one billion billion -- 1018 -- places that can support life

So we can take this to be a universe that breeds life; and yet, were any one of a considerable number of physical properties of our universe other than it is -- some of those properties basic, others seeming trivial, almost accidental -- that life, that now appears to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere..."

On this we agree.

"...A few years ago it occurred to me -- albeit with some shock to my scientific sensibilities -- that my two problems, that of a life‑breeding universe, and that of consciousness that can neither be identified nor located, might be brought together. That would be with the thought that mind, rather than being a late development in the evolution of organisms, had existed always: that this is a life‑breeding universe because the constant presence of mind made it so..."

You lost me here. Were the dinos 'intelligent' or is only man intelligent? How many random extinctions did we have to endure to get us here? Will we survive the next event (assuming we don't do ourselves in first)?

 

[ding]

On this we agree.

I'm glad you acknowledge the unnaturalness of a universe that produces life and intelligence.

You lost me here. Were the dinos 'intelligent' or is only man intelligent? How many random extinctions did we have to endure to get us here? Will we survive the next event (assuming we don't do ourselves in first)?

The answer to your first question can be found in self awareness and abstract thought.

If you understood the steps needed for intelligence to arise, you'd know how silly your 2nd and 3rd questions really were. Try giving some thought to the requirements for intelligence to arise. Then you might be able to see the big picture of how everything is connected. I'm beginning to think you think evolution is a series of random events. Evolution isn't random. Life evolves the way it does for reasons.

 

[alang1216]

I'm glad you acknowledge the unnaturalness of a universe that produces life and intelligence.

That is exactly NOT what I agreed to. I believe life is abundant in the universe and that is completely natural given that evolution will produce it. Intelligence is quite another matter. Ours is both natural and random.

The answer to your first question can be found in self awareness and abstract thought.

So there was no intelligence on our planet for 4 billion years yet it is inevitable?

If you understood the steps needed for intelligence to arise, you'd know how silly your 2nd and 3rd questions really were. Try giving some thought to the requirements for intelligence to arise. Then you might be able to see the big picture of how everything is connected. I'm beginning to think you think evolution is a series of random events. Evolution isn't random. Life evolves the way it does for reasons.

Evolution is life reacting to changes. On a stable planet, life would fill every niche and then remain essentially unchanged ever after. There is no 'reason' for intelligence.

 

[ding]

That is exactly NOT what I agreed to. I believe life is abundant in the universe and that is completely natural given that evolution will produce it. Intelligence is quite another matter. Ours is both natural and random.

You are proving my original point; life and intelligence are natural outcomes of our universe because the nature of matter and the laws of nature predestine life and intelligence to emerge. Which is why it occurred naturally. It's not an accident. It is literally part of the fabric of existence.
Proving that life complexifies and that intelligence is predestined to arise is the easy part. The fossil record contains the proof. You just have to know and understand what the requirements for intelligence to emerge are. Do you?

So there was no intelligence on our planet for 4 billion years yet it is inevitable?

Yes, life and intelligence are part of the fabric of existence. The potential for every diverse and wonderful form of life existed because the fabric of matter and the laws of nature made it possible and time made it probable.

Evolution is life reacting to changes. On a stable planet, life would fill every niche and then remain essentially unchanged ever after. There is no 'reason' for intelligence.

Yes, life does a remarkable job being interconnected and working together and responding to change. There's no such thing as "stable" environment on a geologic timescale though.

If you are arguing that intelligence does not provide a functional advantage, I'm going to have to stop you right there, and let the idiocy of your statement sink in. Intelligence is a functional advantage. As such - intelligence in and of itself - is the reason intelligence naturally evolved (complexified) for living things.

 

[alang1216]

You are proving my original point; life and intelligence are natural outcomes of our universe because the nature of matter and the laws of nature predestine life and intelligence to emerge.

Not sure what you mean by 'predestine' since my dictionary gives it a supernatural slant. The exact opposite of natural. What I can agree to is:
life and intelligence are natural outcomes of our universe because the nature of matter and the laws of nature predestine do not forbid life and intelligence to emerge.

Which is why it occurred naturally. It's not an accident. It is literally part of the fabric of existence.
Proving that life complexifies and that intelligence is predestined to arise is the easy part. The fossil record contains the proof.

I'm familiar with the fossil record and have to disagree here.

You just have to know and understand what the requirements for intelligence to emerge are. Do you?

I'm guessing you'd not agree that I do so why don't you clue me in?

Yes, life and intelligence are part of the fabric of existence. The potential for every diverse and wonderful form of life existed because the fabric of matter and the laws of nature made it possible and time made it probable.

Not sure about the fabric part but I have no real issues.

Yes, life does a remarkable job being interconnected and working together and responding to change. There's no such thing as "stable" environment on a geologic timescale though.

If you are arguing that intelligence does not provide a functional advantage, I'm going to have to stop you right there, and let the idiocy of your statement sink in. Intelligence is a functional advantage. As such - intelligence in and of itself - is the reason intelligence naturally evolved (complexified) for living things.

We've been around for a few hundred thousand years while dinos/birds have been around for a few hundred million. If intelligence was so valuable why has it taken so long to evolve?

 

[ding]

Not sure what you mean by 'predestine' since my dictionary gives it a supernatural slant. The exact opposite of natural. What I can agree to is:
life and intelligence are natural outcomes of our universe because the nature of matter and the laws of nature predestine do not forbid life and intelligence to emerge.

predestine: to destine, decree, determine, appoint, or settle beforehand. Life and intelligence are a part of the fabric of matter/energy. Arguing the laws of nature do not forbid life and intelligence to emerge is the opposite of reality.

I'm familiar with the fossil record and have to disagree here.

That's because you don't understand what the fossil record is telling you about the complexification of life.

I'm guessing you'd not agree that I do so why don't you clue me in?

Try me. I'd love to hear your take on the steps/requirements for how beings that know and create came about.

Not sure about the fabric part but I have no real issues.

Life is finely tuned into the structure of energy/matter. Change the structure of matter slightly and no life would be possible anywhere.

We've been around for a few hundred thousand years while dinos/birds have been around for a few hundred million. If intelligence was so valuable why has it taken so long to evolve?

Why does pace matter? The first life forms had a rudimentary intelligence/consciousness in that they could sense, react and adapt to their surroundings. Intelligence/consciousness has only complexified since. But again, it is idiotic to argue that intelligence does not offer a functional advantage and would evolve naturally because of it.

 

[alang1216]

predestine: to destine, decree, determine, appoint, or settle beforehand. Life and intelligence are a part of the fabric of matter/energy. Arguing the laws of nature do not forbid life and intelligence to emerge is the opposite of reality.

Sorry but I fail to see a guiding hand. If there was no random? meteor there may never have been us.

That's because you don't understand what the fossil record is telling you about the complexification of life.

Are mammals more complex than dinos or birds?

Try me. I'd love to hear your take on the steps/requirements for how beings that know and create came about.

Random good fortune for us, mostly being at the right place at the right time.

Why does pace matter? The first life forms had a rudimentary intelligence/consciousness in that they could sense, react and adapt to their surroundings. Intelligence/consciousness has only complexified since. But again, it is idiotic to argue that intelligence does not offer a functional advantage and would evolve naturally because of it.

I wonder how many creatures were on a path to intelligence but never made it? Some dinos were smarter than others but it didn't help them survive the asteroid.

 

[ding]

Sorry but I fail to see a guiding hand. If there was no random? meteor there may never have been us.

Who said anything about a guiding hand? That sounds more like a polytheistic belief than a monotheistic belief. Existence is logical and good and naturally unfolds.

Are mammals more complex than dinos or birds?

By most objective measures, yes. Maybe you can't see the forest for the trees.

Random good fortune for us, mostly being at the right place at the right time.

So in other words you have no idea at all? It's not that hard to figure out if you are thoughtful about it. But it goes beyond us. Maybe this will help.

I wonder how many creatures were on a path to intelligence but never made it? Some dinos were smarter than others but it didn't help them survive the asteroid.

I don't believe that's how it works. Life seems interconnected. As if it is a single living organism; a highly complex, emergent, adaptive system. I could make the same observation of the universe as a whole. There's nothing random about any of this.

 

[alang1216]

Who said anything about a guiding hand? That sounds more like a polytheistic belief than a monotheistic belief. Existence is logical and good and naturally unfolds.


By most objective measures, yes. Maybe you can't see the forest for the trees.


So in other words you have no idea at all? It's not that hard to figure out if you are thoughtful about it. But it goes beyond us. Maybe this will help.
View attachment 675915

I don't believe that's how it works. Life seems interconnected. As if it is a single living organism; a highly complex, emergent, adaptive system. I could make the same observation of the universe as a whole. There's nothing random about any of this.

You make a lot of assumptions and conclusions based on only one species on one planet in one solar system in one galaxy in one universe.

 

[ding]

You make a lot of assumptions and conclusions based on only one species on one planet in one solar system in one galaxy in one universe.

Actually that couldn't be farther from the truth. I look at the totality of the evolution of space and time and how life and intelligence evolved from it.