Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
I'm still going with the idea of the teenage boy running a simulation well in the future on very sophisticated systems observing us and sometimes interfering a bit. he probably laughs when people worship him in all sorts of odd ways!

Oh aye - it fits the facts.  Mind you, I'd suggest that maybe a longer timescale might fit better?  Something like.....

Early Genesis: pre-school boy gets the game.  Sets up one command ("don't eat fruit") then is lured away by Polemon.
c. Flood: now around 10-11, boy remembers game, sees it has all gone wrong.  Wipes everything out with re-set (flood) button.  Tries again with some typical small-boy commands ("don't do this!  Don't do that!"), laid down with little or no understanding of human nature.  Then gets distracted by girls.
New Testament: now around 19-20, probably at Celestial Uni.  Has discovered flower power and grooviness.  Logs into game one summer when he returns home and tries a "soft" re-set where the flower child comes to earth and says "just be excellent to each other"but doesn't have the time to properly remove all the old code and rules, leaving the mash-up we now have.  Then back to Uni for exams and then into corporate life, marriage, etc.
Today: older and wiser - perhaps with real kids of his own - he now realises that meddling does nothing helpful, so is perhaps now just watching and hoping.  I just hope that nest stage is not.....

Tomorrow: Angry at a messy divorce, he logs back into the game and decides to activate the Revelation Apocalypse option.
General Religious Discussion / Re: No evil s**t in new testament??
« Last post by jetson on Yesterday at 07:03:11 AM »
Take a look at this site, NT stuff is towards the bottom of the page.
Skeptics Annotated Bible
General Religious Discussion / No evil shit in new testament??
« Last post by eh! on Yesterday at 06:44:06 AM »
Same lady I debate. Says all evil shit is in old testament.

I pointed out Mathew 5:17

still says all the bad stuff is in OT. Any horrific shit in NT or is it all love thy neighbour as long as he not gay?
I'm still going with the idea of the teenage boy running a simulation well in the future on very sophisticated systems observing us and sometimes interfering a bit. he probably laughs when people worship him in all sorts of odd ways!
And if he knows everything, he then surely can't understand what it's like to study and learn a subject? He surely doesn't know what it's like to not know math and have to study it to learn it?

Well, an omniscient god would - simultaneously - know everything; would know what it was like to have always known everything; what it was like to learn everything from nothing; what it was like to know nothing; and know what it was like for every point in between nothing and everything.

Further: that god would also know what it was like to be each human who ever existed; what they know at every point in their lifetimes; how they learned it; how they felt while they were learning.....and so forth.

And not just about learning - an all knowing god would know how each person felt at each point in their life about everything - and, in addition, would know what it would feel like to be any potential but (in actuality) never-existing human at every point in their hypothetical lives.

So if you already knew with certainty how any possible creation of yours would feel and think and act about any possible conceivable situation......what on earth would be the point of actually creating any of those beings?  Or, indeed, of actually creating any universe, since you would already know of anything and everything that might or could happen at any point in that universe's existence?

A TRULY omniscient god, would have absolutely zero need or desire to create any universe.  So the only conclusion is that if there IS a god who created the universe (or even just man), that that god must perforce NOT know everything.  And a god with "gaps" in its knowledge, of how its creation might think or feel, or how it might act, is a scary thing indeed......just like the god that is actually portrayed in the Bible: unlimited power, but limited knowledge and understanding.
Heh, Ron, that is an interesting thought! What would it mean to have always existed? Indeed, existence is almost not the right way of putting it, really. There is another way of looking atr it, though.

Infinities come in various sorts and various sizes, even though all are infinite. For example a set of all prime numbers is an infinite set, yet it is smaller that a set of all whole numbers. now the idea of infinite sets bring to mind and obvious fact - an infinite set of numbers has a starting place, say at '1' but no ending place. So maybe we have been sold a poor concept of infinite by not mathematical philosophers like Lane Craig. Maybe god did have a beginning in whatever time zone he inhabits and it is just that he carries on into the far distance of infinite time.

I think it is a serious problem for those who want to have god as always existing to explain how that could happen. Point out the a god capable of creating a universe[1] needs to be more complex than the universe and so needs a cause[2] to have created it. The only way they can manage to avoid that is to say that god always existed but that is  an assumption without biblical justification, logical thinking or, worst of all, evidence. A god that had some time of its own creation works better, though it bring the Christians lots of problems.
 1. not exactly what the bible claims, but we can let it pass for now!
 2. a seriously ill-define word that is manipulated to make Christians feel as thought they have won!
Chatter / Re: "What are you listening to now"... take three...
« Last post by Emma286 on Yesterday at 03:11:08 AM »
Might sound bad, given I'm from England, but I don't know tons on them either! I tried listening to a few of their songs a while back, but the only one (so far) I really like is "Burn" which was in "The Crow" movie. Not knocking the band for what they are, just don't think (generally) their stuff is my kind of thing.

That said though, I quite like the catchiness of that last tune!
Chatter / Re: Some central London pics
« Last post by Emma286 on Yesterday at 02:54:54 AM »
Still, guess I'll be used to being 36 soon enough and, really, it's no different anyway!

You could do what I do - I've been 21 for damn near 20 years :)

And I've reached the 29th anniversary of my 29th birthday.


Thanks for the pics, Emma. I was in London just over 2 years ago and had a much nicer stretch of weather than they were having at home in Connecticut. I was in England for all of April, and saw rain about three times with very mild temperatures while Connecticut still managed to have frosty days and even a couple of inches of snow almost until I returned home.

Anyway, happy birthday! Get used to those years slipping by faster :)

No worries jynnan! :-) Hoping that you enjoyed your stay! I'm glad that you were able to visit at a time that we were having decent weather. Out of interest, what kind of time of year was that? I don't know much about how weather temperatures typically differ over in the US to ours during different season times. I know that it typically gets colder over in New York during winter months compared to how things usually work out here during winter now days (though we used to get very cold winters here too) - but that's about it!

Many thanks for the birthday thoughts, much appreciated. :-) Haha am sure I will, indeed, start to get more used to it.
Chatter / Re: What are you watching on TV?
« Last post by Emma286 on Yesterday at 02:31:22 AM »
There are 2 series that my son and I are keeping up with.  They are Better Call Saul (a prequel to Breaking Bad) and Fargo. (by the same writers as the movie) I was also watching This is Us and will probably catch it when new episodes come back.

I remember you mentioning Breaking Bad before. Thought the story line sounded intriguing at the time. Will have to double check to see if it's still being shown on Netflix. I never watched the Fargo movie, but will take your word for that (on the writers). Interesting to know that one was directed by Kathy Bates. I've always really liked her as an actress (just found that out online). Thinking that also sounds interesting. Thanks for the mentions. Hope you and your son are enjoying all the shows.
Chatter / Re: What are you watching on TV?
« Last post by Emma286 on Yesterday at 02:18:46 AM »
I greatly enjoyed Humans 1 - like many, I found Humans 2 to be less interesting.  Won't spoil it for you with the "whys"!

Haha no worries there on the spoiler thing. :-) Will get to figure out the why's soon enough! I was originally in two minds about getting it - thinking I'd wait till after I'd reached the end of the first season to decide. Still, I ended up recently receiving it as a gift, so thinking I might as give it a whirl. Thanks for the feedback though, good to be aware of. If I find the same there will probably forget about checking out season 3 - if it does end up being made.

Westworld, funnily enough, felt much the same - good premise at the start, went off track a little as it went along (assuming Westworld Season 1 is the equivalent of Humans 1 and 2).

I've heard of that show before (am pretty sure) but forgot about it since. Thank you for the reminder! As I really like the 1973 movie (though never got into Future World as much) that's definitely one I'd be interested to check out some of at least. That's a shame that it went off track though. It's such a shame when that kind of thing happens and ruins a show.

If you can catch it, Aliens TV show was pretty good - Aliens crashed in central UK, so we built a big wall round them and had border guards etc.  A very British take on what might really happen if an alien life-form appeared.

Appreciate the mention. Am pretty sure I haven't heard of that one before. Good to be aware of. :-)
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10