Posted on 07/02/2010 6:56:08 PM PDT by Desdemona
Good observation. Just another example that "good taste" or "harmony" is also man-made, and that culture (man-made) and the effect of habit tend to enforce these definitions as "true".
The concept and what constitutes deity (God) also changes from culture to culture and from era to era. Only totalitarian minds insist on officially "true" colors, music, taste, and God, because they are protecting their own man-made definition of truth.
Thus, in the former Soviet Union, along with prescribed politically correct thinking, only classical art was considered "true." Modern art was forbidden.
In America it used to be anathema to for women to wear white stockings after a certain time of the year (and it still might be), and in Japan for the longest time only those of ethnic Japanese ancestry could become sumo wrestlers because only the Japanese ethnicity conferred the "dignity" necessary for that calling!
The opposite of that are people who are no less purists by who insist that traffic rules are too restricitrve and that driving on both sides of the street as you will is true freedom, and damn the consequences!
And you have Jews who say Torah was written by God before the world existed, who say that God chose the Jews to convince the world that Yahweh is the only God, and then you have Christians who claim the Jews were wrong and they are right and their triune God is true, and he will convert the world and even most of the Jews eventually and show them their "error," and then you have the Muslims who also want to convert the unbelievers or they will cut off their heads.
It seems to me that man created his God, in his image and character, just the way he would like to be. Is an idealized projection of man that is used to justify what men do.
Wrong. Poetry is elected.
Does the phrase "it doesn't do it justice" mean anything to you?
Hence the judicious choice of the word "required".
Nice try, though.
Get lost, toll! I never, never said I chose atheism.
Poetry is not required in this world. It’s elected. If you can’t understand that, I can’t help you.
LOL! "Toll"?
When dyslexics attack!
"Get thee behind me, Santa."
Never "said" or never "admitted" ...?
So you're a coward as well as an atheist, then?
Cheers!
Spoken like a man who has never tasted love, either human or divine.
Cheers!
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
He had just *attempted* to call me a troll.
I thought an immediate tag-back w.r.t. that one post was acceptable: especially as I included the very text I was replying to.
Nonetheless, acknowledged, and I will comply.
Cheers!
YOU:Get lost, toll! I never, never said I chose atheism.
Well, I'll ask you now.
1) Are you an atheist?
2) Do you acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God, the Savior of the World, who was put to death for our transgressions and raised for our justification?
3) ...and you never did answer the question about your take on YOUR free will, regarding belief or unbelief.
Cheers!
True but all our organs are continually being replaced with new cells, and when injured, they heal.
There is no reason whatsoever for a cell to die other than an enzyme
I remember hearing a series of lectures on longevity by medical reasearchers and biochemist working on the problem. One of them's statement stayed with me. She said the fundamental problem they face is that on the cellular level, the processes of aging is the same as the processes of living.Kind of like natural curing addiction with addiction.
There are good, bad, good/bad and neutral mutations. Of course, you would point out that these qualifiers are man-made or at least from man's perspective. In the long run, we don't know.
Procreation problems could have been naturally adjusted by adjusting reproductive periods and estrus duration, sharply reducing offspring numbers.
That occurs, or similar adjustments, already. Predators and resource depletion also contribute. This means cataclysm for the species involved, with man it would be approaching Armageddon.That doesn't strike me as an intelligent design but a reactive design.
I think you likely don't see "design" in the picture, but life eating life to live is IMHO more than reactive. It's the way the whole system works, everything is part of many cycles, interdependent. Not only food, but oxygen, nitrogen, water, minerals, etc. etc.
At some point radiation and other factors damage our cells leading to breakdown.
Radiation also causes mutations - ones that help us survive as well.
So, all this seems to be adaptive.
I don't think you mean adaptive here, unless you're saying the underlying process of creation is adaptive and designing.
When longevity becomes an essential survival tool the body will turn on telomerase and prolong cell-life.
Just a personal opinion, I doubt this factor will affect unless/until reproduction occurs in old age.
For a changing world
That's the key, we live in a world of constant change, nothing stays the same. You can't build a once-and-for-all system. It must incorporate change. It seems to be teleological. From matter to one cell life, to multi-cell, to intelligence, to consciousness, to... ?
Thanks again for your reply.
Actually I thought it was evidence for the the opposite. Why did you come to your conclusion?
Poetry is something man-made. Man created it, man chooses is. It is not required. It is elected. End of dicussion.
No.
Do you acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God, the Savior of the World, who was put to death for our transgressions and raised for our justification?
No.
and you never did answer the question about your take on YOUR free will, regarding belief or unbelief
It's called reason.
Which is why great music and poetry is called "inspired" ("God-breathed")...
Nice try, though.
You might want to revisit "Men without Chests" in C.S. Lewis's The Abolition of Man.
Or even Pascal's "Le coeur a ses raisons, que la raison ne connaît point."
Cheers!
It's called reason.
Define the terms and demonstrate their relevance: speaking on code words from your own subculture, without further explanation, does not enhance your reputation, nor does it persuade others, outside of your circle.
Superciliousness is neither necessary nor sufficient to gain your point.
And recall my earlier quote from Pascal.
Cheers!
The proofs and models of mathematics are elegant. The same could be said of the most profound science theories.
Indeed, without that elegance we'd be hard pressed to understand the physical Creation at all.
More importantly, the Names of God are elegant:
“Elegant” is a great word. Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.