Click here to close
New Message Alert
List Entire Thread
Msg ID: 2704281 This Quoth the Whales… +2/-2     
Author:Shooting Shark
9/19/2021 1:33:51 PM

A sermon from the Great Whales. To the citizens of Atlantis.

Among the humans it is said: Money is power. Power is used to exert ones will, yet these human will not harness themselves to a divine  value system,  which is explosive--and self destructive, like fire and gasoline.

Yhe real question for humans today is about how to define  "values".

Jesus, facing his execution, famously told Pilate "My kingdom is not of this world"..

there's a lot of meaning in that statement.

The physical world invades our consciousness, even us sea creatures most value instinctively to preserve and extend our physical existence.

By extension, those humans with the most money have that same basic survival instinct. They find themselves desperately trying to preserve their personal wealth, their lives, and the system that gives them "power."

Today they want to expand capital markets globally because to do otherwise would guarantee the collapse of their monetary value system.

Yo this end they enlist various sources of power: information, diplomacy, laws, military force, and yes, financial coercion. Their best aspirations they might justify their sometimes ignoble actions, trying to build and extend human material prosperity for the greatest number of humans:

"pragmatic values."

So Gates, Soros, the Koch Brothers, the Rockefellers the Rothschilds all find themselves somewhere between a rock and a hard place. They can't give up their own power. They feel they must use it.."responsibly"-- but this is not inclusive,  Millions of less productive and the unfit will need to die, to preserve the lives and fortunes of billions.

They seek the modern Holy Grail, "whom does it serve?"

The "Protestant Work Ethic" still existed  when the ruling classes today were growing up in America.

The Secular approach they promoted because it gave them power over religious objections.

But secularism soon reduced human existence to "Materialism".. and in the process, the values humans absorbed were chiefly to preserve and expand theor (Material) American way of life-- They needed to be good producers and consumers. 

In the process the  former "Protestant work ethic" was soon stripped of its basic values --a spiritual "worth ethic" that was previously the basis of the American society that we sea creatures remember.

Should their "worth" today be defined by a long life, and secure,  secular material prosperity?

No, the vacuum created in modern times by this loss of Protestant ( and Catholic ) religious values created a distinct void in their souls . Even in their self-definition, in America. The values placed in their "constitution" and "bill of rights" seemed to no longer fit other "pragmatic" necessities.

The truth is, man is not unique in Creation, being more than just material flesh and blood. Consciousness itself is a "spiritual" interaction with the brain, and with others. Even we sea creatures have it, to some degree.

The "Will" (and values) emerge not from the supposed Marxist "collective biological substrate" but from a spiritual world that is unseen, yet is seen in constant tension between those human souls that "worship the body," and those souls who "worship the creator."

The challenge for humans today is to find, or perhaps rediscover their own "worth ethic" -- How one spends their time and money reveals what that "worth ethic" really is.

One soon finds a limit to happiness in pursuing material possessions, and even the wealthiest among these humans know that.

Everyone wants this Big Lie the present propaganda and financial manipulation of human governments and personal freedoms to end. But the truth is not to be found in the "worth ethic" of materialism.

The Roman Empire, Pilates kingdom, was also doomed to fail in the grand scope of history. Rather it morphed into today's human struggles for more power and control.

But Jesus Kingdom still exists too.

"Find something small to do for others, and do it with a great deal of love" the Great Spirit has said.

Maybe then, real wealth will exist for them again in the spiritual realm, where their "Worth Ethic" really ought to be.. Humans are "made in the Image of God" and need fill that divine void in their souls, once and for all.

--Thus Quoth the Whales.

--Shooting Shark, Governor of Atlantis. 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704284 Did Jesus exist? (NT) +2/-1     
Author:TheCrow
9/19/2021 2:02:44 PM

Reply to: 2704281


Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704287 "Did Jesus exist?" Just the question makes you nervous, doesn't it? +2/-1     
Author:TheCrow
9/19/2021 2:21:49 PM

Reply to: 2704284

Of course, you're being a great white shark with no literary culture to rely on, especially from the quarter of the Earth's surface (land) that you've never visited, which is as remote and hostile to you as the moon's surface- you can have no real idea of what happened a couple thousand years ago in a historically chaotic and diverse region, an oppressed colony of Rome. You and yours never saw it. In fact there is no record of an actual witness of Jesus of Nazareth person. None. N-O-N-E.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704289 "Did Jesus exist?" Just the question makes you nervous, doesn't it? +2/-3     
Author:Shooting Shark
9/19/2021 2:40:55 PM

Reply to: 2704287

SpoKen like a true atheist.

And you don't believe in the supernatural, either.

Photographic evidence of a ghost doesn't mean a thing to you, of course, 

Saint Pauls supposed transformative "vision"-- epilepsy no doubt, right?

And as for eye-witnesses, plenty.

As for evidence, there is more extant evidence for jesus existence than for Plato,

But you choose to promote bad 19th century speculations about naturalistic evolution instead

( I admire your faith) 

Stubborn, holding onto "evolution" in the face of the obvious complexity of modern organic chemistry 

which has no working model of macro or micro "evolution" 

just adaptive changes seen within the irreducible basic "design"of existing life 

"Intelligent design"-- but you want to be a souped up chimpanzee -- and yo some degree you are. 

Not too surprising really.

You love promoting "Big Lies"

As for my kind,

We've already been around for 60 million years

You humans should do as well.

Without any natural predators, your doomed to prove Thomas Malthus correct eventually 

Except, you do have natural predators.

Gates is one, for starters.

Covid-   eugenics for the 21st century! 

Now please, apologize to Hitler...

when you meet him in Hell.

 

Always remember:

"Some animals are more equal than others"

Useful Idiot! 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704374 "Did Jesus exist?" Just the question makes you nervous, doesn't it? +2/-0     
Author:TheCrow
9/20/2021 9:59:39 AM

Reply to: 2704289

The Earth is flat? You can see that.

Where in the Bible does it deny evolution?

Science quietly wins one of the right’s longstanding culture wars

A new survey reveals a resounding victory for advocates of evolution and a setback for purveyors of pseudoscience

By MATTHEW ROZSA
PUBLISHED AUGUST 24, 2021 6:23PM (EDT)

Human Evolution Illustration (Getty Images/Man_Half-tube)Human Evolution Illustration (Getty Images/Man_Half-tube)

The bitter culture wars over the teaching of evolution in public schools dominated headlines throughout the 2000s, in large part because of the Bush administration's coziness with evangelicals who rejected the science on evolution. Yet flash forward to 2021 — when the acrimonious battle over science has shifted from evolution to pandemic public health — and few youngsters are apt to have any idea what "intelligent design" even means. Curiously, despite the right seizing on face mask science and immunology as new battlegrounds in the culture war, the fight over evolution is all but forgotten. In fact, for many Americans, it is completely forgotten. 

Though it might seem hard to believe, Americans are more scientifically literate than ever in 2021 — so much so that creationism has become a minority opinion. And Americans are likewise been able to identify intelligent design and other forms of creationism as the inherently religious theories that they are. 

We know this thanks to a new study published in the journal Public Understanding of Science, one which analyzed surveys of public opinion since 1985 and noticed a trend in attitudes about evolution. As more Americans became highly educated — obtaining university degrees, taking college science courses, displaying rising levels of civi science literacy — acceptance of evolution grew accordingly.

From 1985 until 2010, there had been a statistical dead heat among Americans who were asked if they agreed that "human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals." Acceptance then began to increase, becoming a majority position in 2016 and reaching 54 percent in 2019. Even 32 percent of religious fundamentalists accepted evolution as of 2019, a stark contrast from the mere 8 percent who did so in 1988. Eighty-three percent of liberal Democrats said they accept evolution, compared to only 34 percent of conservative Republicans.

"Almost twice as many Americans held a college degree in 2018 as in 1988," Dr. Mark Ackerman, a researcher at the University of Michigan, said in a statement. "It's hard to earn a college degree without acquiring at least a little respect for the success of science."

The shift in attitudes towards evolution is particularly surprising given that the teaching of evolution was a major aspect of the culture wars of the late from the 1980s through the 2000s, particularly during the Bush Era in which the evangelical right was ascendant. Back in 2005, the then-raging culture war involved the so-called theory of "intelligent design," and, specifically, a textbook called "Of Pandas and People."

In a defining moment for the 1990s and 2000s culture wars, the board for Pennsylvania's Dover Area School District had instructed its ninth grade biology teachers to refer their students to "Of Pandas and People" because it promoted intelligent design. By 1997, the strategy of using intelligent design as a Trojan horse for creationism had picked up enough steam to wind up at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Once there, however, the school district was told that their philosophy was indeed a form of "creation science" and just as scientifically invalid. When the Dover case was heard by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in 2005, a judge appointed by President George W. Bush sided with the plaintiffs and noted the irony of people who claim to be religious dishonestly claiming that they did not admit to having a religious agenda.

"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID [intelligent design] Policy," the judge noted in his decision.

Even though the Supreme Court had banned teaching creationism in the 1968 case Epperson v. Arkansas, nine other prominent legal cases occurred between 1981 and 2005 (including the ones in Louisiana and Pennsylvania that were mentioned earlier). Legal setbacks notwithstanding, the teaching of evolution remained a hot button issue by the time of the 2000 presidential election. In 2005, Bush even legitimized the intelligent design movement by telling reporters that "both sides ought to be properly taught" and that "part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought." His scientific adviser later added, although he did not want creationism taught as an alternative to evolution, "I think to ignore [ID] in the classroom is a mistake." As recently as 2014, popular science entertainer Bill Nye held a high-profile debate with young-earth creationist Ken Ham.

There is a long history of evolution being rejected in the United States, although a generation of Americans did not even know they had a theory to be potentially scandalized about. While Charles Darwin's classic book "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" made waves in his native Great Britain upon its release in 1859, the book did not arouse widespread ire in the United States until the late 19th century. The issue was particularly contentious among American Protestants, who at that time were splitting into modernist and evangelical camps. By the 1920s, the theory of evolution had been tied in the public mind to other "modern" intellectual trends that they found distasteful, from Marxism to psychology. Fundamentalists pushed to ban the teaching of evolution in public schools since — as former Democratic presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan put it — the theory would convince future generations that the Bible was simply "a collection of myths."

Bryan had a chance to test his views in court during the Scopes Trial, when he squared off as an expert witness on the Bible against legendary attorney Clarence Darrow. American journalist H. L. Mencken famously wrote with contempt about the inevitability of Darrow's defeat and the massive support for anti-scientific theories, howling that "such obscenities as the forthcoming trial of the Tennessee evolutionist, if they serve no other purpose, at least call attention dramatically to the fact that enlightenment, among mankind, is very narrowly dispersed." 

That exchange, dramatized in the play "Inherit the Wind," turned public opinion against Bryan, but ultimately did not curb the anti-evolution movements, which won further successes after it was banned in Arkansas and Mississippi. A turning point did not occur until the 1940s, when scientists in the United States had reached a consensus that natural selection drove evolution and explained the rise of human beings.

By 1947, the Supreme Court had ruled in Everson v. Board of Education that the First Amendment's clause banning the establishment of religion applied to state governments, not just the federal government. As Justice Hugo Black wrote, teaching an explicitly theological doctrine like creationism meant citizens were being taxed to back a religious point of view.

"No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion," Black said.


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


The 1947 decision, which was reinforced in a series of other cases over subsequent decades, made it clear to opponents of evolution that they had to adopt a different tactic. By the 1980s a University of California, Berkeley law professor named Phillip E. Johnson came up with a concept known as "intelligent design." It holds that the complexity of life on this planet is so precise that strictly naturalistic explanations cannot rationally account for them, and that scientists need to acknowledge possible religious or supernatural causes. This movement, though rejected by most scientists as merely a spruced up attempt to teach creationism, gathered enough steam that by the 21st century many states were pushing for laws to allow intelligent design to be taught in public school. 

While it is welcome to scientists that acceptance of evolution continues to spread, fundamentalists still pose a threat to America's overall scientific literacy.

"Such beliefs are not only tenacious but also, increasingly, politicized," lead researcher Jon D. Miller of the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan said in a statement, pointing to the widening gap between Democrats and Republicans on basic science literacy.


MATTHEW ROZSA

Matthew Rozsa is a staff writer for Salon. He holds an MA in History from Rutgers University-Newark and is ABD in his PhD program in History at Lehigh University. His work has appeared in Mic, Quartz and MSNBC.



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704396 "Did Jesus exist?" Just the question makes you nervous, doesn't it? +2/-0     
Author:TheCrow
9/20/2021 12:56:35 PM

Reply to: 2704289

"Photographic evidence of a ghost doesn't mean a thing to you, of course"

First, one has to believe that 'ghosts' would have physical manifestation to provide evidence:

"... the soul of a dead person, a disembodied spirit imagined, usually as a vague, shadowy or evanescent form, as wandering among or haunting living persons."

What physical manifestations of spirits or souls has ever been recorded? None has ever been verified as such although there are images alleged to be that of ghosts that are not adequately explained otherwise. You contend that lack of scientific explanation is scientific explanation.

One either believes in science in the universe or juju shyte. Your inciination to conspiracy theory indicates a naive willingness to believe in imagined issues.

Atheism has nothing to do with that. Atheism is dogmatic denial of any God and I am not an atheist.

I believe in God but not organized churches which are largely commercial institutions. The cliche is 'power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'? Money is power in our society and that power corrupts tempting commercial religion into great power of corruption.

Yes, I go to 'meeting houses' for fellowhip, but there is no 'preaching'. Being a 'Quaker' I believe that God reveals truth and being to everybody, but most are not cognizant.

Interesting that you limit God's power in creation to your understanding of creation. A dog is a dog and dogs were always dogs because of that. There was no ancestor of a dog that was not fully a dog. So, there is no extinction of any species because the species that exist were so always, therefore those that are not can never have been....

That's all well and good for you. Believe what you will, but limiting the belief of others is an unwarranted imposition. That is entirely consistent with your Trumpism. So, when is the violent Purge going to occur when you imprison or execute heretics?



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704446 You’re full of shit, as usual.  +1/-3     
Author:Shooting Shark
9/20/2021 9:40:58 PM

Reply to: 2704396

We've been over this before...

Evolution is a term promoted by atheists and agnostics to describe the assumed natural processes by which all life on earth "happened". No God or creator required.

By definition, Evolution is not Creation.

Creation is a traditionally theistic term which assumes an intelligent creator was to a very large degree involved in the design, development and emergence of life on this planet- and possibly elsewhere. "God" is commonly invoked as Creator, but some have imagined "aliens" of some higher knowledge were somehow responsible.

Evolution is not, and cannot be Creation.

Neo-Darwinism is an attempt to salvage a Godless-Naturalistic emergence of life as a first premise. That's impossible unless you can demonstrate the actual evolution of a living cell from its constituent parts

 

(irreducible complexity) 

Then, we can talk about dinosaurs. Darwin knew nothing of Genetics.

Also, the idea of naturalistic evolution is somewhat ridiculous philosophically.
Who exactly is the Intelligent Observer (man?) who has determined that the universe is blind, naturalistic?

What then can we conclude about "intelligence" vs blind Natural laws?
Where does "man's intelligence" end, and  the blind dumb natural universe begin?

(intellectual solipsism)

Ok, enough elementary semantics.

You misused the word "Evolution" if you mean "God"

As for ghosts, you can say what you want, humans have commonly experienced the phenomena

It appears poltergeist, for example, can act in material ways-- moving stuff 

And it appears ghosts may be illusions "seen" (a projection in the mind of the observer-) or be a shadow involving light registers le by s digital camera- ia human likeness, which moved on a "live photo" when no other shadows in the photo moved.

Boleskine Cemetary, October 31, 2019.
I was there and was as surprised at that time

as you seem to be insistent in your personal skepticism. 
( maybe it's YOU who's scared if the implications.) 

Which is why perhaps you made the stupid statements about Jesus' historical existence above, 

( I guess a physical resurrection is outta the question, am I right?) 

Believe what you want.
But don't call it "evidence"

You spout your personal beliefs as facts,

because you seem to me to be  an insecure individual.


"There are more things in Heaven snd Earth Horatio,

then ever dreamt of in your philosophy"

 

Which is why, in essence, on this subject in particular

again you seem to be a foolish propagandist

and a brash, arrogant 

Useful Idiot

 

 

 



Return-To-Index  
 
Msg ID: 2704516 You know exactly how God operates in all things? That's your position. +3/-0     
Author:TheCrow
9/21/2021 1:52:13 PM

Reply to: 2704446

Evolution exists and has been observed, proven.

The issue with creation, from nothing to something is being investigated. Several scientifically sound theories have been proposed.

The issue of the origin of life is also being investigated.

But first, one has to agree on what is 'alive'.

Are viruses 'alive'?

Are prions 'alive'?

What is 'intelligence'?

What is 'intelligent'?

If the universe can explained as the result of natural processes, why not?

What was the latest miracle you observed? How do you know it was a miracle? Suppose God decided to miraculously affect reality- wouldn't the process appear to be seamless and scientific? Otherwise, it would be proof of God's existence and limitations come with existence. Faith is boundless, just as God is. All that exists (and more) is through God.

I reckon that implies God can do whatever, without limitations. But anything created has limits, a start and an end. You and I aren't smart enough, can't be smart enough to exceed those limits. You can't tell God how to do things, as you apparently believe you can.

So why wouldn't he use evolution? Observed and proven scientifically. Why? Because that's how God decided to do that. 

It fits the patterns we're learning of existence, without a 'magic trick'.



Return-To-Index