Did God answer prayer for healing?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Saint, Nov 9, 2020.

  1. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    The doctrine of “Original Sin” as it is taught, say in Calvinism, is wicked, and unfair to both God and children.

    So, I might be right there with you on that one.

    Calvinism, in general is wicked, in my opinion, and should be thrown into Hell where it belongs.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    I believe that story is an allegory of humans becoming intelligent, i.e eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. This event can actually be traced to the mutative fusion of 2 chromosomes, that caused the emergence of Homo Sapiens (smart human).
    Yes, I can agree with that. But it was a rare beneficial genetic mutation , a lucky accident, that caused the relatively sudden increase in human intelligence.
    I believe that is an incorrect interpretation. Is human intelligence bad? I do agree that intelligence is a double-edged sword.
    We are a race separated from all our genetic common ancestors. We are the only hominid with 23 pr genes.
    The Evidence:
    http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

    A new species of hominid, homo sapiens (smart human), able to manipulate tools and natural rhythms. Agriculture, Husbandry, Hoarding, Shelters, Entertainment, Art, the list is long and is indicative of how far we have strayed from the natural procession. Note that many much simpler organism already mastered many of these domestications, just not at the level of sophistication of humans.
    Depends on how you look at this. I believe intelligence and mastery of our environment is a great gift. The problem is, we don't always use our intelligence wisely. We have become too smart for our own good. This is contained in the allegory of being cast out from paradise (losing touch with Nature). IOW, we THINK we are independent and apart from Nature, but we are all part of Nature and subordinate to Natural laws. They are inescapable.
    I agree with that. Life is a stochastic evolutionary progression from the Now into the Future, thereby creating the Past (Time) in the process. So far, for all our great technical and artistic advancements we have managed to make a mess out of this Paradise we call earth. And we are beginning to pay the price for our hubris.

    In that respect the biblical allegory is close to how (not when) things happened. But of course, I believe that the concept of a motivated God is superfluous. IMO, the term Nature describes the essence, the nature of the Universe and allows for a critical examination of how things happen in our observable reality.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    In my Universe...

    Both Love and Hate are indeed emotions, but they are also real choices.

    No one has to Hate.

    A person can choose to Hate someone who does not legitimately deserve it.

    No one has to Love.

    A person can choose to Love someone who does not legitimately deserve it. Perhaps in a similar way that God Loves us!

    They are both choices.

    I did not “fall in love” with my wife against my will.

    It was a choice I made.

    I specifically and deliberately chose her and hand picked her out from millions of other choices.

    She did the same thing with me. But I obviously got the better end of the deal.

    And I also really do regard Hate as being equivalent to Evil. That is why I used Evil as the antonym of Love.

    I also regard Love as being equivalent to Good.

    And even Good and God as equivalents.

    Notice, there is only one letter differentiating the two. Hey, I just thunk that up!

    But we are just kicking words around on this point.

    There are a few exceptions...

    To Love Evil is Evil.
    To Hate Evil is Good

    (PS: Don’t tell anyone, but I never voted for Trump! Just our little secret.)
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Can you please prove that?

    Or is that just your belief?
     
  8. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Naturalism, an unproven Atheistic belief system, is exclusively being used to interpret the data.

    No other views or methods are even allowed to have a voice in the room. Only one is allowed to speak in the classroom, all must bow down to Naturalism, or be insulted and ridiculed.

    Freedom of thought not allowed!!!

    This is how Atheism is taught, and force fed to children in schools, by masquerading as Scientific fact.

    When viewed through a Theistic belief system, the interpretations of the same data are very different.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  9. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    I gave you the link. I'll repost it.

    Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
    Alec MacAndrew

    Introduction

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Conclusion
    http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm
     
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    You have this exactly backward.
    Atheism and by extension Naturalism, relies on scientific facts and Science is always open to revision and/or refinement.i.e. Freedom of thought and correction (the scientific method).

    It is Theism that is rigid. Scripture is rigid in scope and interpretation.

    Example, Lutheranism:
    If we compare just the Judeo-Christian religions, they have been at war over the same God for 2000 years.
    Those are your words.....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There is no freedom of thought allowed in religion!!!

    OTOH, Science and the mathematics of Science are universally accepted. No one ever went to war over the concept that 2 + 2 = 4. This has allowed science to make many revisions in Universal "origins", Universal "laws", and Universal "functions", each revision a closer symbolic approximation and representation of axiomatic (proven) truths.

    There is total freedom of thought but Mainstream Scientific Theory is achieved only by general consensus.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  11. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    I applaud you!!! ...................

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    candy likes this.
  12. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Really?

    That’s a good story!

    Are any Theistic interpretations allowed in discussions leading up to the general Atheistic Naturalistic consensus?

    No!

    Both the discussion and consensus must be Atheistic Naturalism exclusively!

    Atheistic Naturalism is always forced onto the data.

    Is Theism ever allowed to interpret the data in the classroom?

    No!

    Only Atheistic Naturalistc interpretations are allowed!

    Atheistic Naturalistic interpretations are always forced onto the data.

    Certainly, you can see this!
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  13. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Thanks! But it was supposed to be our little secret!
    ...and that’s kind of a big guy!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ...and I don’t want the mob to come get me!

    (Be strong Seti, be strong!)
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    Now that's interesting. Which mob are you talking about? The non-vaccers? I am not too worried about them.
    They will get sick and die or recover and become immune. If they want to take that route, good luck.
    You are showing strength of clear thought and conviction. Now is not the time to be afraid of anything but that little invisible enemy that is hell-bent on eradicating every living human it can infect. There is no reasoning with that kind of enemy. Active defenses and complete control of the virus as the primary threat are the only effective response to a pandemic. The virus never gets tired and will take every opportunity to invade, and invade, and invade. Until it is eradicated. The sooner, the SAFER!

    There is a real threat of an evolving strain that is resistant to any vaccination and is an existential threat to mankind.
    It won't be the first time in the history of the earth that an entire species has fallen victim to a bacterial or viral organism.

    Shout your decision from the rooftops! You are being a responsible citizen who cares for his country and fellow citizens. You can hold your head high. You have my respect........

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    They were for 2000 years and found scientifically wanting.

    Note: I am not talking about some of the moral lessons that are contained in scripture. I am sure it has had an influence on current modern morals. I am only talking about the scientific accuracy of scripture and that has been found inaccurate as a Scientific Document.

    So, Theists need to learn to live in harmony with Science, because Science's only task is to analyze and record observable Natural phenomena, in an objective manner, without any prejudicial morality. Nature is neither good, not bad. It is stochastic and absolutely neutral.

    Life must take life in the interest of life itself, that is the moral of Nature (as evident by Covid). Viruses are not bad, they want to live. Insects aren't bad, they want to live. To the viruses and bacteria humans are the mortal enemy, cause human want to live.
    That is the nature of Nature. Every organism has an equal chance to exist if it survives "natural selection".

    The Hellstrom Chronicle
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2021
  16. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,933
    It's a logical, scientific consensus, based on evidence.
    Which brand of theism would you use? In Canada, Roman Catholicism is the predominant brand. In Iran, Islam is the predominant brand. In Utah, Mormonism is the predominant brand. Would you have children taught different "truths" in different places?
     
  17. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,362
    The supernatural does exist, but I’m not so sure about god
     
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    Why must it be "supernatural"? Why not "metaphysical"? That is a Natural term and has meaning in science.

    Supernatural by definition is unmeasurable as it does not exist in this reality. It is removed from any kind of observation or measurement, even by inference.

    There are many metaphysical objects. They usually are the emergent potentials from complex patterns, such as thought or a condition which is defined by the suffix; " something-ness".

    What is the suffix "something-ness" mean?

    Quality and State

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/-ness
    But that does not make them supernatural objects, they are metaphysical (abstract) potentials.
     
  19. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    Similar design is attributed to two aspects...

    1) Both have the same Designer (God)
    2) Both were designed to live in the same environment.

    Evolution is occurring...

    Only in reverse!

    Beneficial mutations can occur but they are extremely rare.

    The majority of mutations are harmful.

    Harmful mutations are not selected out or rejected, because they are often too minor to be fatal, and to minor to affect the reproduction of the species.

    Millions of people are walking around the Earth right now with harmful genetic mutations, but they can reproduce just fine!

    Over time, more harmful mutations are passed on than beneficial ones, which cumulatively cause the eventual extinction of the species.

    If this is true, then the number of species on the Earth should be reducing over time.

    Which is exactly what we actually do see.

    Genetic Dilution is also going on, and it is not ultimately beneficial. It can have temporarily benefits, but Genetic Dilution causes the permanent loss of genetic code over time. And when it is lost, it is lost forever!

    With both of these occurring, God’s original design information, the original genetic code, is cumulatively corrupted and lost over time, not gained.

    The species extinction rate of 99% backs this up perfectly. We only have 1% left to go!

    If evolution ultimately causes increased survival, stronger creatures, and more heathy variations, then the number of species should be exponentially growing in number and in frequency, but it is not.

    Right now, more species are going extinct than are being created.

    Extrapolate that singular fact into the future, and you have the eventual extinction of all life on this planet.

    With Evolution as the cause!
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2021
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    No, they had a common ancestor. And both were adapted by natural selection to the same environment, over hundreds of thousands of years.
    True.
    No, evolution is always toward greater complexity or efficiency.
    Reverse evolution is "devolution" (descent or degeneration to a lower or worse state).
    I agree
    I agree, but note that most large mutations (such as the fusion of human chromosome 2) are rare. The most common evolutionary changes are due to other factors, such as gradual genetic drift (very small mutations) over long periods of time.

    Evolutionary processes:
    http://www.uvm.edu/~lehiggin/teaching/bio1/evol_process.html
    No, that is using the wrong interpretation of the data. New species emerge everyday also.
    Example: new strains of Covid, and growing exponentially (genetic drift)
    No species have no specific growth rate. Populations do.

    Examples : Mankind, Insects, Bacteria and Viruses.
    That may be true but the ones that experience steady growth of any percentage will grow exponentially in numbers.
    Example: Human population is growing @ + 1 %, which means a doubling every 70 years. 8 billion today, 16 billion in 70 years, 32 billion in 140 years (watch the Professor Albert Bartlett lecture on the exponential function)
    Numbers of Insects (Species and Individuals)
    https://www.si.edu/spotlight/buginfo/bugnos
    Nooo, quite the opposite.
    As the Hellstrom Chronicle posits: there are two species that are definitely on the increase; Humans and Insects.
    a) Humans, because we can control our environment to some extent.
    b) Insects, because they can adapt to anything we do to the environment.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2021
  21. SetiAlpha6 Come Let Us Reason Together Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,283
    You have a right to and are welcome to your own personal opinion.

    Not all Scientists would agree with you.

    The “Consensus” of what is the popular view today, is very often not the truth of tomorrow.

    I have no problem with you, holding your view.

    I do have a problem with the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines, such as education, to force feed your view on our children.
     
  22. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,933
    You're the last person who should be commenting on scientific consensus. You probably think there are scientists who are giving up on evolution.
    Again, that's how science works. It's self-correcting.

    Religion, on the other hand, was wrong yesterday, is still wrong today and will still be wrong tomorrow.
    That's why we oppose creationism in schools.
     
    Write4U and foghorn like this.
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,718
    Because it is science. Can you do better than the people who study natural phenomena.

    And what justifies the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines such as education, to force feeding non scientific theistic views on our children?

    The concept of "intelligent design" and "irreducible complexity" has been scientifically debunked (with evidence) in a court of law. Do you object to courts of law? Do you object to the "establishment clause"?

    All you are doing here is refusing to accept the best possible scientific explanation of people who study these things.

    Look at the refusal to believe science about Covid and the results of ignoring the scientist's warnings about the evolution and speciation of organisms.

    At some point you need to accept the scientific evidence.


    p.s. Note: I am not commenting on the spiritual part of "describing" subjective reality.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2021

Share This Page