Philosophy Discussion Forums

Belindi

Satan is not good. He is a bad creature. He hates light and is the enemy of light. He is dark and love darkness. He is the enemy of man.

He says, human is a humiliated beings and I am so higher and better than him. He wishes the worst for man even so much worse than death.

He is evil and unclean. We humans should use all our senses and consider him as a hard enemy. He spread out enmity and hatred between humans. He don't know what love is, and is the enemy of love, kindness and friendship. He is so much selfish, nervous and frowned with worst temper.

He wants to take revenge on man in the worst possible way, because he think this disreputable being caused he lost his authority and high rank. The fire of enmity and hostility is flaming from his heart and spirit.

He doesn't choose death for man because he knows death is not the highest revenge on man but he wants to take humans to hell along with himself.

Some humans who follow racism, dictatorship, fanaticism, ignorance, evil and illegal sexuality believe in him and follow him and join the darkness that Satan himself is in.

He has promised to take revenge on man and he will never stop even for a second.

So imputation light to this cursed enemy is wrong from the basis.

Steve3007 wrote: ↑June 9th, 2020, 6:21 am

Greta wrote:It's a false dichotomy anyway. Evolution is accidental in its details but certainly not random over time. Evolution is ultimately pragmatic. Darwin referred to "survival of the fittest" but I think evolution as theory's greatest flaw is it does not go far enough. For instance, what of the "evolution" (scare quotes are only for the pedantic amongst us) of simple chemicals to complex ones that preceded abiogenesis?

I think it depends on the sense in which we're using the word "evolution" at any given time. In the broadest sense that I can think of, it simply refers to any kind of change. Any changing physical system can be, and is, referred to as evolving. But that doesn't mean that it can't also be used in more specific contexts. Back to semantics again!

I see evolution as simply the gestation, growth and development of the biosphere as a whole. We think we are all separate, but we all stemmed from LUCA. In that sense, we are the entity we called LUCA, who is now about four billion years old, and has grown innumerable new structures over that time. But that is just limiting one's views to biology because the Earth's geology has been evolving too, ditto the solar system, the galaxy, and I expect that Laniakea is evolving too.

Again, I see no problem in seeing it as that if you're using a fairly general sense of the word "evolution". Yes, we are (the evidence suggests) all evolved from a LUCA, so, yes, in that sense we are not separate. Or you could say that we are all parts of the Earth's crust, so in that sense we are not separate. But in some other senses, clearly we are separate.

But the trouble with statements of the form "we think we're all separate but..." is that it seems to imply, to some people, that there is a binary, mutually exclusive choice between two worldviews, one of which says "everything is part of a whole" and the other of which says "there are separate things", and so those people will have pointless arguments with you about that because they don't acknowledge the context in which you say what you say.

My issue is with both sides, Steve - both those who focus on it all being one thing and those who focus on the differences. It's a simple paradox that any even slightly sophisticated mind should be able to handle with the same ease that you can be both a father to your children and, presumably, a brother to your sibling/s. One does not preclude the other.

While there is no need to stop at LUCA and accept that we are part of the Earth. To quote Michelle Thaller:

I actually think of myself as a very complicated rock. I am made of things like iron and copper and manganese. When you sit down on a mountainside and you are there with rocks, those are your cousins too.

But, really, when you look at our existential situation, the elephant in the room is that the Sun comprises 99.86% of the solar system's mass. The Earth is 0.0003% the Sun's mass. Take a 70kg person. The proportion of their body equivalent to the Earth's mass in relation to the solar system is 0.00021 of a kilogram, or about about 200 milligrams. An average finger weights about 100 grams, about 50,000 times heavier. Even our microbiome, being about 0.03% of body weight is 21 grams. 200 mg is about the mass of one drop of water, one bead of sweat.

My point being that this is the Sun's show and we are along for the ride. We are little more than the Sun's emanations, a portion of its body odour, so to speak. It is impossible for the human mind to grasp how how huge the Earth is, let alone the Sun. The scale is utterly beyond our ken. Never mind Sag A* and other supermassive black holes.

Gods, the lot of them, as far as I'm concerned. Gods don't need minds, just all-encompassing influence, power and relatively eternal life. Planet Earth too is a god, or demigod, one that includes all life. But the closest aggregations to the gods of mythology are human societies themselves. In humanity en masse we have a collective entity that actually cares to some extent about us. We can petition it for what we want and need, and it provides or denies, its ways being often mysterious, so to speak :)

Belindi wrote: ↑June 9th, 2020, 1:10 pm How does Mans know the light is God's or Satan's ?

Not to answer for the one called "mans", but the answer to the question how does 'man',that is; human beings, know the light is God's or satan's is by and through agreement. 'That', which is in agreement with EVERY one is God's. This is because 'that', which is thee actual Truth of things cannot be refuted, and so is in agreement with EVERY one.

So called "satan's light' is that what is not true and thus not in agreement with EVERY one.

Greta wrote:My issue is with both sides, Steve - both those who focus on it all being one thing and those who focus on the differences. It's a simple paradox that any even slightly sophisticated mind should be able to handle with the same ease that you can be both a father to your children and, presumably, a brother to your sibling/s. One does not preclude the other.

Yes. Another form of the theory of relativity! (Although I wouldn't call that a paradox.)

But, really, when you look at our existential situation, the elephant in the room is that the Sun comprises 99.86% of the solar system's mass. The Earth is 0.0003% the Sun's mass. Take a 70kg person. The proportion of their body equivalent to the Earth's mass in relation to the solar system is 0.00021 of a kilogram, or about about 200 milligrams. An average finger weights about 100 grams, about 50,000 times heavier. Even our microbiome, being about 0.03% of body weight is 21 grams. 200 mg is about the mass of one drop of water, one bead of sweat.

Some great stats there. The one that jumps out at me is that our microbiome weighs 21 grams. (I'll be a pedant and say has a mass of 21 grams). There's a popular meme that the soul also weighs 21 grams, which originates in some dodgy Victorian experiments with dying people and other animals. I wonder if we can conclude, for fun, that our gut bacteria are our immortal souls? Gut reaction = soul reaction. I suppose, as long as we're not cremated, they probably will outlive us, at least for a while.

My point being that this is the Sun's show and we are along for the ride. We are little more than the Sun's emanations, a portion of its body odour, so to speak. It is impossible for the human mind to grasp how how huge the Earth is, let alone the Sun. The scale is utterly beyond our ken. Never mind Sag A* and other supermassive black holes.

Absolutely. When my kids were young, for some reason, I thought it important to impress this on them so I cut a 2.5 metre diameter circle out of a large sheet of yellow paper and stuck it on my eldest son's bedroom wall, then added cutouts of the planets to the same scale. (Earth about 2,5cm diameter). Standing back, it vividly illustrated the fact that if the Earth, somehow, fell into the Sun it would probably cause only a temporary local ripple. Of course, 2D cutouts still don't show the true scale, but making a 2.5 metre globe was beyond me.

Gods, the lot of them, as far as I'm concerned. Gods don't need minds, just all-encompassing influence, power and relatively eternal life. Planet Earth too is a god, or demigod, one that includes all life. But the closest aggregations to the gods of mythology are human societies themselves. In humanity en masse we have a collective entity that actually cares to some extent about us. We can petition it for what we want and need, and it provides or denies, its ways being often mysterious, so to speak

The welfare state as God? The civil service as God? Perhaps government as God and the civil service as the Angel Gabriel. There's a thought.

cynicallyinsane wrote: ↑March 5th, 2007, 11:07 amIf there is a god, why doesn't he prove that he exists? Why does he leave us without any compelling evidence of his existence?

Those are two separate questions with two different answers.

cynicallyinsane wrote: ↑March 5th, 2007, 11:07 am If there is a god, why doesn't he prove that he exists?

He did, according to the scriptures.

cynicallyinsane wrote: ↑March 5th, 2007, 11:07 amWhy does he leave us without any compelling evidence of his existence?

Because He figured proving himself once was good enough, according to the scriptures.

Steve3007 wrote: ↑June 10th, 2020, 2:20 am

Greta wrote:My issue is with both sides, Steve - both those who focus on it all being one thing and those who focus on the differences. It's a simple paradox that any even slightly sophisticated mind should be able to handle with the same ease that you can be both a father to your children and, presumably, a brother to your sibling/s. One does not preclude the other.

Yes. Another form of the theory of relativity! (Although I wouldn't call that a paradox.)

But, really, when you look at our existential situation, the elephant in the room is that the Sun comprises 99.86% of the solar system's mass. The Earth is 0.0003% the Sun's mass. Take a 70kg person. The proportion of their body equivalent to the Earth's mass in relation to the solar system is 0.00021 of a kilogram, or about about 200 milligrams. An average finger weights about 100 grams, about 50,000 times heavier. Even our microbiome, being about 0.03% of body weight is 21 grams. 200 mg is about the mass of one drop of water, one bead of sweat.

Some great stats there. The one that jumps out at me is that our microbiome weighs 21 grams. (I'll be a pedant and say has a mass of 21 grams). There's a popular meme that the soul also weighs 21 grams, which originates in some dodgy Victorian experiments with dying people and other animals. I wonder if we can conclude, for fun, that our gut bacteria are our immortal souls? Gut reaction = soul reaction. I suppose, as long as we're not cremated, they probably will outlive us, at least for a while.

My point being that this is the Sun's show and we are along for the ride. We are little more than the Sun's emanations, a portion of its body odour, so to speak. It is impossible for the human mind to grasp how how huge the Earth is, let alone the Sun. The scale is utterly beyond our ken. Never mind Sag A* and other supermassive black holes.

Absolutely. When my kids were young, for some reason, I thought it important to impress this on them so I cut a 2.5 metre diameter circle out of a large sheet of yellow paper and stuck it on my eldest son's bedroom wall, then added cutouts of the planets to the same scale. (Earth about 2,5cm diameter). Standing back, it vividly illustrated the fact that if the Earth, somehow, fell into the Sun it would probably cause only a temporary local ripple. Of course, 2D cutouts still don't show the true scale, but making a 2.5 metre globe was beyond me.

Gods, the lot of them, as far as I'm concerned. Gods don't need minds, just all-encompassing influence, power and relatively eternal life. Planet Earth too is a god, or demigod, one that includes all life. But the closest aggregations to the gods of mythology are human societies themselves. In humanity en masse we have a collective entity that actually cares to some extent about us. We can petition it for what we want and need, and it provides or denies, its ways being often mysterious, so to speak :)

The welfare state as God? The civil service as God? Perhaps government as God and the civil service as the Angel Gabriel. There's a thought.

Given that we have no absolutes to cling to, relativities are all we have.

Re: the microbiome weighing the same as old weight claims for the immortal soul :lol: Given that the soul apparently weighs significantly less than the amount of excrement in a dead person's bowel, that would suggest something that us philosophy forum have known for a long time - that there appears to be far more crap in this life to deal with than soulful things. I guess the commonness of garbage in life spawned the concept of sacredness. Good things would have seemed like oases in a desert, blessed relief from the politics, violence, unfairness and deprivations of olden times.

I like the way you made clear the scale of things to your young 'uns. I look up at the Sun and see the nucleus of our solar system's atom (like a million others have done). Sure, some things change with scale but, whether you have elliptical orbits or probabilistic orbitals is ultimately just detail. The main fact is that both stars and atomic nuclei are essentially a central zone of concentrated matter that is enormously more massive than the smaller stuff around it that organises them into layers through either the SNF or gravity. We can observe the same dynamic in human society (and many other things), where politicians and executives of multinational organisations organise their people and resources into strata, based largely on seniority and geography.

Welfare states and the like are mere demigods. If you want something with the attributes given to gods you need to go planetary (or lunar, for that matter). Consider the Earth - it includes every animal mind and every human mind - and everything else that Carl Sagan listed in his pale blue dot speech. Consider this collective entity that contains every human mind and so much more to one's tiny self. If that's not godlike, I'm not sure what is (aside from the Sun and Sag A*, the latter having extra godlike qualities of time-bending and (near) immortality but they are so remote that they would only function as creator deities rather than interventionist ones.

Before telescope is invented about two centuries ago, humans thought finally there is a boundary beyond the night sky.

Now human has succeeded to make the most powerful telescope, Hobble and situated it in one of the orbits around the earth, the telescope that can discover a celestial body at a distance of several million light years!

But it couldn't find any limitation or end for the space. This what God pointed to, about 1400 years ago!


...return your gaze (to the space), do you see any beginning of its creation? (3) Then return your gaze once more and yet again, your look comes back to you amazed, and astonished. (4)

I can't really make out an argument in what you're saying but I presume it's something along the lines of "some stuff that couldn't possibly have been known at the time was written down a long time ago. Therefore God." It's a very well worn one. It's been said many times in this forum before. I'm not really interested in discussing it again. But if it's what you believe, go for it.

The real gods are right in front of our noses all the time - the Sun, the Earth etc but we instead invent quasi-human entities that we can relate to, that treat as as important - which the real gods like the Earth, the biosphere, the Sun, and human society do not.

In the end, it's so difficult to find people who can relate to and understand us, who won't judge or cheat that, when under duress, many will access their better self, which resides within each of our psyches.

Steve3007 wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 12:50 pm I can't really make out an argument in what you're saying but I presume it's something along the lines of "some stuff that couldn't possibly have been known at the time was written down a long time ago. Therefore God." It's a very well worn one. It's been said many times in this forum before. I'm not really interested in discussing it again. But if it's what you believe, go for it.

Steve, your respond annoys me. You instead using scratching expressions can speak better and say, " I don't believe in". Your manner of discussion is offensive and out of respect. I didn't call a user namely Steve3007 to believe in God, but I just spoke about God and published the word of God for thinking.

This is your second time that encounter my comments offensively. Please stop this manner of responding and if you have another belief you can express it more logically and respectfully. Your answers have the smell of animosity. Please leave this way and just relate your own belief without offend other believes especially the holly one. God doesn't need you to believe in him but as I bring some of his verses here I expect you that encounter my comments gentlemanly.

Mans wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 7:27 pm

Steve3007 wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 12:50 pm I can't really make out an argument in what you're saying but I presume it's something along the lines of "some stuff that couldn't possibly have been known at the time was written down a long time ago. Therefore God." It's a very well worn one. It's been said many times in this forum before. I'm not really interested in discussing it again. But if it's what you believe, go for it.

Steve, your respond annoys me. You instead using scratching expressions can speak better and say, " I don't believe in". Your manner of discussion is offensive and out of respect. I didn't call a user namely Steve3007 to believe in God, but I just spoke about God and published the word of God for thinking.

This is your second time that encounter my comments offensively. Please stop this manner of responding and if you have another belief you can express it more logically and respectfully. Your answers have the smell of animosity. Please leave this way and just relate your own belief without offend other believes especially the holly one. God doesn't need you to believe in him but as I bring some of his verses here I expect you that encounter my comments gentlemanly.

How about working on not being so easily offendable?

Greta wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 6:53 pm The real gods are right in front of our noses all the time - the Sun, the Earth etc but we instead invent quasi-human entities that we can relate to, that treat as as important - which the real gods like the Earth, the biosphere, the Sun, and human society do not.

In the end, it's so difficult to find people who can relate to and understand us, who won't judge or cheat that, when under duress, many will access their better self, which resides within each of our psyches.

Sometimes our nose can be a troublesome thing between us and reality

Terrapin Station wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 7:34 pm

Mans wrote: ↑June 11th, 2020, 7:27 pm

Steve, your respond annoys me. You instead using scratching expressions can speak better and say, " I don't believe in". Your manner of discussion is offensive and out of respect. I didn't call a user namely Steve3007 to believe in God, but I just spoke about God and published the word of God for thinking.

This is your second time that encounter my comments offensively. Please stop this manner of responding and if you have another belief you can express it more logically and respectfully. Your answers have the smell of animosity. Please leave this way and just relate your own belief without offend other believes especially the holly one. God doesn't need you to believe in him but as I bring some of his verses here I expect you that encounter my comments gentlemanly.

How about working on not being so easily offendable?

Because of a verse of God that I spoke about?!

Just for this guilt?!!

Mans wrote:Steve, your respond annoys me. ... This is your second time that encounter my comments offensively. Please stop this manner of responding...

I apologize for offending you and will not post responses to your posts in future.

Incidental point. I posted this:

viewtopic.php?p=360125#p360125

as a quote of myself saying the same thing in a previous post, as a way to reiterate it. But it seems to have been removed from the quote tags.