|
Post by bombmaniac on Aug 5, 2010 1:20:21 GMT -5
youre telling me...alex...youre telling me...what jews believe...really?
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Aug 5, 2010 1:26:51 GMT -5
youre telling me...alex...youre telling me...what jews believe...really? Oh sorry. It was supposed to be phrased like a question. I was looking for confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by low on Aug 5, 2010 1:37:38 GMT -5
So fitting that Christians get Heaven and Hell and Jews get "meh".
|
|
astro
Meteorite
llamas are awesome!
Posts: 36
|
Post by astro on Aug 5, 2010 1:42:37 GMT -5
In my opinion, something wouldn't spontaneously explode and create life and a perfect environment for it to survive in. Plus, there's something called faith. (Not trying to offend anybody) What makes you say this is perfect...sounds like you are speaking from a matter of perspective of what perfect is? Survival is just a mechanism built in us, so that we would try to survive in any condition anyway. Equivocation fallacy
|
|
|
Post by Benyamin on Aug 5, 2010 1:52:16 GMT -5
On a different but not unrelated topic, how would bacteria or whatever have evolved eyes without knowing that light exists? or ears without knowing sound?
|
|
astro
Meteorite
llamas are awesome!
Posts: 36
|
Post by astro on Aug 5, 2010 2:33:09 GMT -5
On a different but not unrelated topic, how would bacteria or whatever have evolved eyes without knowing that light exists? or ears without knowing sound? basically, early on in evolution some organisms formed light detecting cells over a long period of time it evolved and started cupping around and eventually formed a lens. Source:Knowledge over time, & Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eyeIf neither that info / wikipedia source doesn't answer your question or you want it coverd more...let me know. I'm glad you wrote the question the way you did, a lot of people usually say..."how come we all evolve / have eyes etc..?" and the simple answer to that is..we don't evolve our eyes and other features, yet we inherit them from out ancestors.
|
|
Mr. O
Meteorite
Posts: 39
|
Post by Mr. O on Aug 5, 2010 7:31:02 GMT -5
"sheol" is not something you get stuck in. True enough. From what I read of it, the concept never seemed so much like a kind of "stuck-in" thing as much as it was just the obvious consequence of death.
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Aug 5, 2010 13:57:28 GMT -5
not even...most people think of "sheol" as somewhere you go...or what happens after death...most of the time it is referenced it is a state of mind, it is a feeling of sinking into nothingness--total despair. what you're thinking of is the eqivalent of "eternal suffering" jews dont have eternal suffering. eventually if the soul will never be worthy of paradise the soul will return to god, essentially causing that "person" to cease to exist.
|
|
Mr. O
Meteorite
Posts: 39
|
Post by Mr. O on Aug 5, 2010 15:10:25 GMT -5
not even...most people think of "sheol" as somewhere you go...or what happens after death...most of the time it is referenced it is a state of mind, it is a feeling of sinking into nothingness--total despair. what you're thinking of is the eqivalent of "eternal suffering" jews dont have eternal suffering. eventually if the soul will never be worthy of paradise the soul will return to god, essentially causing that "person" to cease to exist. I'm assuming based on a number of remarks you've made that you're Jewish, or at the very least have a stronger interest in the religion than I do. That said, I'm more than willing to cede to the points your making. It is true, I've been under the impression that Sheol is some kind of proper-noun-using location situation. Sheol, like Hell or Heaven for the Christians, was just where they went whenever they died. And, honestly, I thank you for clearing that up. The best analogue I had for what I thought Sheol was is best seen as the first stage of Hell in Dante's Inferno. Just a separation from live, God, and things like that. Nothing particularly negative, but nothing positive either. I'd love to know more about this, so if you would be willing point me in the right direction, literature-wise (including anything you might deem obvious), I would great appreciate it.
|
|
|
Post by Benyamin on Aug 5, 2010 18:11:56 GMT -5
On a different but not unrelated topic, how would bacteria or whatever have evolved eyes without knowing that light exists? or ears without knowing sound? basically, early on in evolution some organisms formed light detecting cells over a long period of time it evolved and started cupping around and eventually formed a lens. yes, but without being able to sense light in the first place, how would they form light-detecting cells in the first place?
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Aug 5, 2010 19:12:33 GMT -5
You're misunderstanding how evolution fundamentally works, Ben. There's no consciousness to it, no decision maker. Evolution can be broken down into two basic, fundamental parts:
1) Random genetic mutations; and, 2) Selection of superior genes.
The first is utterly random. Mutations can be beneficial, detrimental, or neutral. The second (selection) is just survival of the fittest -- whichever creatures have the genes better suited to survival and reproduction will more successfully pass on their genes than those with inferior genes.
Now that groundwork laid down, the initial development of light-sensitive organs makes more sense. The creatures did not need to know that light existed. All that happened was that a purely random genetic alteration enabled light detection in a life form, and because of that it became better able to survive/reproduce. Therefore that genetic code was able to spread throughout the population. After that, any new genetic mutations that improved that light detection (eventually into sight as it exists today) also were selected for, while anything that reduced it was selected against.
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Aug 5, 2010 19:47:02 GMT -5
@mr O im sorry, i wish there were some "complete guide to judaism" i could point you too...but this is something i have been studying my entire life. and yes, i am an Orthodox jew.
|
|
|
Post by Benyamin on Aug 5, 2010 21:30:27 GMT -5
You're misunderstanding how evolution fundamentally works, Ben. There's no consciousness to it, no decision maker. Evolution can be broken down into two basic, fundamental parts: 1) Random genetic mutations; and, 2) Selection of superior genes. The first is utterly random. Mutations can be beneficial, detrimental, or neutral. The second (selection) is just survival of the fittest -- whichever creatures have the genes better suited to survival and reproduction will more successfully pass on their genes than those with inferior genes. Now that groundwork laid down, the initial development of light-sensitive organs makes more sense. The creatures did not need to know that light existed. All that happened was that a purely random genetic alteration enabled light detection in a life form, and because of that it became better able to survive/reproduce. Therefore that genetic code was able to spread throughout the population. After that, any new genetic mutations that improved that light detection (eventually into sight as it exists today) also were selected for, while anything that reduced it was selected against. K thanks ;D I've been wondering for a while
|
|
Mr. O
Meteorite
Posts: 39
|
Post by Mr. O on Aug 5, 2010 21:47:28 GMT -5
@mr O im sorry, i wish there were some "complete guide to judaism" i could point you too...but this is something i have been studying my entire life. and yes, i am an Orthodox jew. No disrespect intended, by the way, with my remark. As someone who is friends with a number of rather fundamentalist Christians, I know that no religion is really capable of having a "Complete Guide" to them, nor would I properly expect one of it. My hope was, simply, that, like them, you might just have recommended readings or things of that nature. But I understand and respect your position. And I thank you, again, for the clarifications you made for me.
|
|
astro
Meteorite
llamas are awesome!
Posts: 36
|
Post by astro on Aug 5, 2010 22:01:07 GMT -5
You're misunderstanding how evolution fundamentally works, Ben. There's no consciousness to it, no decision maker. Evolution can be broken down into two basic, fundamental parts: 1) Random genetic mutations; and, 2) Selection of superior genes. The first is utterly random. Mutations can be beneficial, detrimental, or neutral. The second (selection) is just survival of the fittest -- whichever creatures have the genes better suited to survival and reproduction will more successfully pass on their genes than those with inferior genes. Now that groundwork laid down, the initial development of light-sensitive organs makes more sense. The creatures did not need to know that light existed. All that happened was that a purely random genetic alteration enabled light detection in a life form, and because of that it became better able to survive/reproduce. Therefore that genetic code was able to spread throughout the population. After that, any new genetic mutations that improved that light detection (eventually into sight as it exists today) also were selected for, while anything that reduced it was selected against. K thanks ;D I've been wondering for a while Thanks nakor, said it better then what my response would of been and glad you understand better too ben ;D
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Aug 5, 2010 22:03:05 GMT -5
Without evolution, we wouldn't have different breeds of dogs! So, is the statement really "Dog is a load of bull crap!" ?
|
|
|
Post by bombmaniac on Aug 5, 2010 22:36:47 GMT -5
theres no need to tread so carefully wound me Mr O i wont smite you with lightning... i didnt mean to come off as prickly...its just that all of my knowledge comes from the talmud, teh bible, various other branches of oral law such as kabballa...theres no single source i can point to except for...all of it if you have specific questions ask me and if i can, ill answer it
|
|
Mr. O
Meteorite
Posts: 39
|
Post by Mr. O on Aug 6, 2010 7:19:56 GMT -5
theres no need to tread so carefully wound me Mr O i wont smite you with lightning... i didnt mean to come off as prickly...its just that all of my knowledge comes from the talmud, teh bible, various other branches of oral law such as kabballa...theres no single source i can point to except for...all of it if you have specific questions ask me and if i can, ill answer it Haha. I'm still trying to discern everyone's tone here, so I'm probably gonna come off as more polite than I need to be. But at the same time, again, I understand completely. If I do have any specific questions, though, I'll be sure to pass it on to you. In the meantime, I'll probably hunt down things through something like The Internet Sacred Text Archive and the copies of the bible that I own.
|
|
|
Post by IMAGINARYphilosophy on Aug 7, 2010 6:09:45 GMT -5
This thread is a collection of more proof that the most ardent defenders of their religion are pathetically ignorant of science in general and evolutionary theory in particular. Frankly, I'm over trying to explain the development of life on this planet to people incapable of doing their own research on the topic.
All I have to say in response to the stunning inanity heretofore is this: The existence of life on this planet we call Earth is no accident. The existence of human beings on this planet we call Earth is no accident. The existence of the Universe in its current form is no accident. None of these premises requires the existence of a Creator, divine or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Aug 7, 2010 7:44:28 GMT -5
And what is your proof that none of these things are accidents?
They are events that have happened and so it is worthless to try and calculate the odds that such an event will occur, but what evidence do you have to support the claim that in a world where physics states that spontaneous generation is impossible, the universe came out of nothing. In a world where nearly 100% of the universe is not made up matter, and yet there exists life.
You cannot say these are not accidents, or happenings of random chance - for they indeed are. And while calculating that chance is irrelevant (for calculating the odds of an event after its occurrence is useless) that doesn't change the fact that it was just a chance.
|
|