sitting this evening with friends chilling out as you do, most of them anti-global capitalists and coca cola came up into the conversation.. you know, we couldn't come up with anything that essentially this giant corporation was doing or has done that might affect adversely other people elsewhere.
all they produce is one bloody great drink that everyone loves.. anyone else heard of or have something on this corporation?.
here's cheers to coke!!.
I remember back in the early 80's???, Coke changed the formula to make it taste more like Pepsi. This made everyone that drank Coke mad. They later went back to the original taste, but then started calling it Coke-Cola Classic. Most people suspected that they did this so they could use corn syrup as the main sweetner instead of the more the expensive sugar that they had been using.
Does anyone else remember this, or know anything about it?
pseudoxristos
maybe some didn't get to this thread, but i thought all would enjoy the thoughts of bertrand russell on religion....one of my faves... .
sincerely,.
district overbeer
I've read and enjoyed some of his books. "Why I am not a Christian" forced me to re-evaluate my own beliefs. From what I remember it is very short and easy to read.
pseudoxristos
i thought that maybe some may want to see another side of the argument of god verses secularism / evolution verses creationism.
im not interested in the fact that many have lost their religious fervor and become atheists or invented their own belief system, or still accept the bible but with a different twist.
my intention is to make as strong of an argument as i can for the existence of a particular god, who i believe we all once knew and may be privileged to know again.
QUANTUM,
The Pseudepigrapha are much more effective in showing that God does not exist and the Bible is nothing but Myth. Adding more fairy tales to support your position is not going to work.
"pseudepigrapha," meaning it is not believed to have been written by the named author.
BTW, you appear to be also quoting 2 ENOCH, but you only give the Date of Origin of 1 ENOCH.
2 ENOCH is later than 1 ENOCH (see below).
Enoch answered the people saying hear my children ,before anything was and before the whole creation took place, the Lord established the age of creation; and after that he made all of the creation both visible and invisible and after that he created man in his own image. He gave him eyes to see, ears to hear and a heart to think with and a mind to council. I swear to you my children that before man was in the womb of his mother we were prepared, each individual and a place for each spirit that each should sojourn here in his proper time, that man might be tested in the balance ..." 2 Enoch 17:
" Enoch went to the Lord who taught him all about creation and his works... He saw matter unorganized before the creation...the council in heaven... He saw Satan aspire and get cast out to become the foundation of lower things, beyond which there ii great darkness and nothing"
2 Enoch 11:
" Then the angel Braboil said: Sit down and write all the spirits of men, all those who have not been born yet, and the places which have been prepared for them. All these things were prepared since before the foundation of the world. And I wrote down all the affairs of men. Secrets of Enoch 10: (Vaillant)
"And everything which is found in this world has been before, and has passed before him and has been arranged [organized] before Him . . . all the creations of the world which have existed in each generation, before they came into this world, have existed before Him in their true form, even all the souls of the children of man have been before they came down to the world, have all been formed before Him in heaven in the very likeness that they have in this world." Zohar III:61
"When an ancient spirit is about to come down . . . to that region which they call the kingdom of Adam, that Archon who is at the head of the place gives the preexistent soul a cup of forgetfulness..."
1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) ENOCH (Second Century B.C. - First Century A.D.)
2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) ENOCH (Late First Century A.D.)
3 (Hebrew Apocalypse of) ENOCH (FIFTH-SIXTH CENTURY A.D.)
Date (2 Enoch): Since no manuscripts older than the fourteenth century are known, any time before that is available as the date by which the book reached its present form. But evidence for the complete texts of the two main recensions is somewhat later than that, and the earliest evidence (that of MPr) different from both of them. This divergence is probably the result of transmission in Slavonic, with extensive expansions and contractions (see nn. to the translation). The original translation could have been made in an early period of Slavic literacy, but even so the supposed Greek composition need not have been produced earlier than A.D. 1000. Of course the Greek author could have made use of ancient material, and almost certainly did. But the very freedom of the treatment makes it impossible to prove that any passage which resembles something in another work is a quotation, whether a quotation from 2 Enoch in some other work of known date (proving that 2En existed prior to the writing of the work which quotes it), or whether a quotation from some other work used by the author of 2 Enoch (proving that 2En must be later thatn the work which it quotes). And, quite apart from the elusive character of such evidence, even if it could be proved that 2 Enoch contains such a quotation, this might be no more than a late gloss, and not an integral part of the original work. Of this character are the references to the Julian calendar which are obvious glosses and settle nothing concerning the date of the main text. The suspected echoes of the New Testament seem to be of this kind, and betray more likely the hand of a Christian scribe than the mind of a Christian author. In view of this complicated situation, it is not surprising that dates ranging all the way from pre-Christian times to the late Middle Ages have been proposed for the production of 2 Enoch.
pseudoxristos
edited for clarity
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 11 July 2002 3:17:49
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Francois,
Being the skeptic Atheist, I'm looking for cracks in the foundation. This may be the first.
FalseChrist - No reward/punishment system, no deadlines. And no, a person who has had the experience is in no better position for anything. No boxtops, nothing to mail in, no salesman will call.
Kinda looks like one of those boxtops that you have to mail in. If not by the individual Man Creature, then by the Man Creature as a whole.
So. Now we have a mind of sufficient complexity evolved from the smart molecule. And now it is endowed with an individual segmentation of cosmic mind. And it has FREE WILL. It can decide whether or not to seek God and to do His will. At first, these attempts are crude. Worship of all that is mysterious, or dangerous, or anything the emerging homo sapiens doesn't understand. Which is pretty much everything. Lightening, volcanoes, eclipses of sun and moon, orgasm, comets, you name it. Then there are polytheistic religions as man becomes more sophisticated and more learned. And polytheism is monotheism in the making. And all forms of worship are acceptable to the great Absolute Reality. He knows we are partial, incomplete, mistaken. He knows we are dust. But we are also made in his image = we are indwelt by a spark of divinity, and we are using a segment of cosmic mind (the brain is not the mind or the spirit, right, it's just an organ) AND we have the gift of personality, that thing that makes you you - instead of me, for instance. And that personality has this freedom to choose.pseudoxristos
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Francois,
Good night. Looking foward to that answer.
pseudoxristos
Hey, just thought of something.
What do you call a Deist that believes in evolution?
Answer: "A Delusionist"
Just a joke, don't anyone take it serious.
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Francois
How 'bout that question concerning evolution being a technique of Deity? You for it or agin it?
If there is a Deity, then yes, he had to use evolution. Otherwise he or his counterpart "Satan", altered reality to make it appear that evolution has occured. I don't see the point of God altering reality, much less Satan. If Satan is responsible, than he would be more powerful than God. It just doesn't work.
The only other nagging point is one I brought up earlier, that is; at what point in evolution does God decide that the Man Creature is worthy of an afterlife?
pseudoxristos
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Francois,
Sounds good to me. I don't even have to believe it and I will survive. Even though I am Atheist/Agnostic there is still that little hope that in the end that we can somehow survive death.
From my own experience my reluctance of giving up on the belief in a burning Hell stems from the thought that if there is no Hell then maybe there is also no heaven. I also did not want to rework my whole belief system. I might discover something that I really didn't want to know. But, in the end my desire to know once and for all what is truth and what is fiction has lead me to the Atheist/Agnostic position. Don't make me rework my belief system again.
pseudoxristos
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Frank,
Is there a reward/punishment condition to this God/Evolution System. If so, what is required of Man to receive the reward. Are those that have had the God experience in a better position to receive some reward? What's in it for me and what do I have to do? Is there a set time frame with a definite end. I'm just looking for a few more details.
pseudoxristos
there is an evolution question bubbling up down the threads a little way, and it minded me to try to really get to the nub of the opposition to the technique.. i would like to pose very serious questions, and i hope they attracts serious, considered responses - once and for all.. why is it impossible, in the minds of anti-evolutionists, that god did indeed create us, the earth, the sun, and everything around us including the entire physical universe, and that evolution was his technique; evolution as a divine technique?
how do you know, how are you so certain that's not the case?
how would you explain your opposition to god if he told you personally that, yep, that's the way he did it alright?.
Im not sure if this point has been brought up yet, but at what point in the process of evolution does God start to consider the creature that will eventually become man, worthy of an after life?
Will those that are less evolved share the same afterlife with man of today?
Will man of today share in the same afterlife of a future evolution of himself?
The atheist view seems more reasonable.
pseudoxristos
edited to add signature.
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 6 July 2002 22:21:55
at festival time the prefect usually brought additional troops to jerusalem to control the crowds.
1. why did the high priest have jesus arrested?
a) the high priest thought jesus was preaching armed revolt against the romans.
Jesus was perfect and without sin, therefore he was not subject to death. Jehovah must have done it.
