***The Official Atheist and Christian Friendly Discussion***

[KRANE]

How could they? I like science and theology though some have asked how I reconcile them. I don't know how completely. But I don't know that science dismantles and discredits God.

One day I was on the train and I overheard a son (about 7) ask his mother why the train slows down when it reaches a curve. The mother replied, "so it won't fall off the track."


The mother may not have been scientifically accurate, but she wasn't dishonest to her son. She gave him an explanation appropriate for his level of development.

Later, when he gets older, he'll learn all about centrifugal force, inertia, kinetic energy, friction and all of Newton's Laws, but for now, the answer she gave him was perfectly fine.

[Brackneyc]

Science has discovered that everything can give us Cancer lol. Coffee is high in antioxidants like red wine and is good in moderation. Caffeine hits the adrenal glands. The only negative thing is that sometimes people get flattened adrenal glands from too much stress and stimulants once in awhile. Oh sorry for taking off topic. God. there we are back on track

They also discovered water was wet.

[BobbyOrr1965]

One day I was on the train and I overheard a son (about 7) ask his mother why the train slows down when it reaches a curve. The mother replied, "so it won't fall off the track."


The mother may not have been scientifically accurate, but she wasn't dishonest to her son. She gave him an explanation appropriate for his level of development.

Later, when he gets older, he'll learn all about centrifugal force, inertia, kinetic energy, friction and all of Newton's Laws. But for now, the answer she gave him was perfectly fine.

Milk for babes and meat for grown men in the faith. Has always been that way. I subscribe to simplicity and the way of spiritual Childhood. To be small makes myself more of a sponge and open to wisdom.

They also discovered water was wet.

And without diluting the truth ???

[Minotaur]

I wonder if what we know of the big bang was actually the Word of God manifesting creation. Twisted?

Even the Vatican takes that as most likely. In fact it was a Catholic priest, Fr. George LeMaitre who first proposed it and was taken seriously. We believe it as OM, the sound of creation by God (Nada Brahma). Buddhists don't give a rat's ass about creation. Lol

[BobbyOrr1965]

Even the Vatican takes that as most likely. In fact it was a Catholic priest, Fr. George LeMaitre who first proposed it and was taken seriously. We believe it as OM, the sound of creation by God (Nada Brahma). Buddhists don't give a rat's ass about creation. Lol

True but they have a map of different 'realms Om would be the first sound of creation?

[Dec4y]

True but they have a map of different 'realms Om would be the first sound of creation?

I've always like this theory. Om describes sound of creation...a constant vibration. Science has reconciles universes into constant vibration strings - interesting correlation to me.

[tallguy29]

I've always like this theory. Om describes sound of creation...a constant vibration. Science has reconciles universes into constant vibration strings - interesting correlation to me.

This is the sound of the CMB (cosmic microwave background) that goes on all the time throughout the Universe. Many millions of years ago, the sound must have been quite loud. This is the sound of the Universe, a constant hum.

http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/BBSound.html
The Sound of the Big Bang
John G. Cramer
Professor of Physics
University of Washington

And you can actually hear the sound of the Cosmic Microwave Background amplified here

http://faculty.washington.edu/jcrame...ng/BBSnd50.wav

[Minotaur]

Om would be the first sound of creation?

Yes, but that's not the complete picture. It wasn't a one time thing. Om (properly it's aum in Sanskrit, almost like aw-m) is creation and knowledge of existence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Om,#Advaita

In Advaita philosophy it is frequently used to represent three subsumed into one, a triune, a common theme in Hinduism. It implies that our current existence is mithyā and maya, "falsehood", that in order to know the full truth we must comprehend beyond the body and intellect the true nature of infinity. Essentially, upon moksha (mukti, samādhi) one is able not only to see or know existence for what it is, but to become it. When one gains true knowledge, there is no split between knower and known: one becomes knowledge/consciousness itself. In essence, Om is the signifier of the ultimate truth that all is one.

Advaita literally means "not two", indicating that everything is one, including ourselves (especially ourselves), with Brahman. That's the difference from the Abrahamic concepts of the soul's relationship to God. That is called "dvaita", which is duality in that the soul in different from God. Advaita says there is non-difference, we just don't perceive it. The Bhagavad Gita screams advaita. Moksha is release, or liberation from this world and its cycles of rebirths.

So, that's basically what om/aum represents.

[Minotaur]

I've always like this theory. Om describes sound of creation...a constant vibration. Science has reconciles universes into constant vibration strings - interesting correlation to me.

This is the sound of the CMB (cosmic microwave background) that goes on all the time throughout the Universe. Many millions of years ago, the sound must have been quite loud. This is the sound of the Universe, a constant hum.

Hindu cosmology is about 5,000 years ahead of what modern cosmology and theoretical physicists are now saying. Dr. Carl Sagan was one of the first scientists to see this correlation. Moreover, ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence over trillions of years. How did the ancient Indians come up with this >5,000 years ago? Beats the hell out of me. Our own universe is predicted to exist for 315.36 trillion years. How accurate that is, we'll have to wait and see.

[lasher]

Hindu cosmology is about 5,000 years ahead of what modern cosmology and theoretical physicists are now saying. Dr. Carl Sagan was one of the first scientists to see this correlation. Moreover, ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence over trillions of years. How did the ancient Indians come up with this >5,000 years ago? Beats the hell out of me. Our own universe is predicted to exist for 315.36 trillion years. How accurate that is, we'll have to wait and see.

There is only a correlation if we actually live in an oscillating universe. That's hardly been established as fact.

[Minotaur]

There is only a correlation if we actually live in an oscillating universe. That's hardly been established as fact.

The correlation refers to the uncanny similarity of the time scales and the theories of multiverses. I said "ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence". The key point is the >5,000 year old idea of a multiplicity of universes, which modern science is getting on board with. I didn't say that modern cosmology says anything about oscillating universes, though theoretical physicists don't rule it out.

[tallguy29]

The correlation refers to the uncanny similarity of the time scales and the theories of multiverses. I said "ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence". The key point is the >5,000 year old idea of a multiplicity of universes, which modern science is getting on board with. I didn't say that modern cosmology says anything about oscillating universes, though theoretical physicists don't rule it out.

Neil Turok's work on open inflation forms the basis of the now-popular multiverse paradigm. With Paul Steinhardt, he developed a cyclic model for cosmology, according to which the big bang is explained as a collision between two ‘brane-worlds’ in M-theory.

Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their famous book "The Grand Design" say "according to M-theory, ours is not the only universe. Instead, M-theory predicts that a great many universes were created out of nothing. Their creation does not require the intervention of some supernatural being or god. Rather, these multiple universes arise naturally from physical law."

I am not saying God wasn't required but Multiverse and Cyclic model are considered very much as possibilities. In fact Turok says, his cyclic model is mathematically proven.

[lasher]

The correlation refers to the uncanny similarity of the time scales and the theories of multiverses. I said "ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence". The key point is the >5,000 year old idea of a multiplicity of universes, which modern science is getting on board with. I didn't say that modern cosmology says anything about oscillating universes, though theoretical physicists don't rule it out.

I was focused on your statement that "almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence". I assumed by come into and out of existence you were referring to an oscillatory model.

Even a multiplicity of universes is still just an untestable hypothesis. Saying modern science is getting on board with it is pretty strong IMO. The idea is out there sure. But claiming it is more than just an idea right now is reaching.

[Minotaur]

Neil Turok's work on open inflation forms the basis of the now-popular multiverse paradigm. With Paul Steinhardt, he developed a cyclic model for cosmology, according to which the big bang is explained as a collision between two ‘brane-worlds’ in M-theory.

Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their famous book "The Grand Design" say "according to M-theory, ours is not the only universe. Instead, M-theory predicts that a great many universes were created out of nothing. Their creation does not require the intervention of some supernatural being or god. Rather, these multiple universes arise naturally from physical law."

I am not saying God wasn't required but Multiverse and Cyclic model are considered very much as possibilities. In fact Turok says, his cyclic model is mathematically proven.

I also don't rule out God as being the creator, I am after all, an unabashed henotheist and monist. When I first read of Hawking's and Mlodinow's The Grand Design I took it wrong; I took it as them trying to disprove God's existence. Not so, of course. Rather, I can actually see what they are getting at, because having read up on Kashmir Shaivism, a basic tenet of KS is that the universe, and by extension we, willed ourselves into existence. That precludes needing a creator God. Only Puranic Hinduism has a creator God. Advaita Vedanta, which Kashmir Shaivism adheres to, basically says the universe willed itself into existence. Now if that is not mind = blown, I'm hard pressed to give a better example. The idea of the pre-existing brane worlds colliding to produce a third is intriguing also. That seems to contradict the "universe ex nihilo" or self-willed creation, but why not several methods of creation?

[Minotaur]

I was focused on your statement that "almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence". I assumed by come into and out of existence you were referring to an oscillatory model.

No, more like soap bubbles... or perhaps universes "pinching one off" via a singularity of a black hole.

Even a multiplicity of universes is still just an untestable hypothesis. Saying modern science is getting on board with it is pretty strong IMO. The idea is out there sure. But claiming it is more than just an idea right now is reaching.

Nothing is tested, but little is being ruled out.

[BobbyOrr1965]

And this discussion on the creation of the universe is mind blowing enough, let alone the possibility of other dimensions or planes of existence. Even an old hypothesis or theory is that on the other side of a black hole is a white whole and alternate universe. Inb4 stargate

[tallguy29]

True but they have a map of different 'realms Om would be the first sound of creation?

Hindu cosmology is about 5,000 years ahead of what modern cosmology and theoretical physicists are now saying. Dr. Carl Sagan was one of the first scientists to see this correlation. Moreover, ancient Hindu scriptures refer copiously to a plurality, almost an infinity of universes that come and go in and out of existence over trillions of years. How did the ancient Indians come up with this >5,000 years ago? Beats the hell out of me. Our own universe is predicted to exist for 315.36 trillion years. How accurate that is, we'll have to wait and see.

When you hear the sound of CMB in the amplified recording http://faculty.washington.edu/jcrame...ng/BBSnd50.wav it is amazing how much it is like the humming sound Of "OM".

Wiki says CMB's discovery is considered a landmark test of the Big Bang model of the universe.
CMB was first predicted in 1948 by Ralph Alpher, and Robert Herman. During the 1970s the consensus was established that the cosmic microwave background is a remnant of the big bang.
So essentially scientists knew of it only in the mid 20th century.

However the Hindus more than 5000 years ago said in the Upanishads (from Wiki)

"as creation began, the divine, all-encompassing consciousness took the form of the first and original vibration manifesting as sound "OM".
Before creation began it was "Shunyākāsha", the emptiness or the void. Shunyākāsha, meaning literally "no sky", is more than nothingness, because everything then existed in a latent state of potentiality. The vibration of "OM" symbolizes the manifestation of God in form ("sāguna brahman"). "OM" is the reflection of the absolute reality, it is said to be "Adi Anadi", without beginning or the end and embracing all that exists. The mantra "OM" is the name of God, the vibration of the Supreme. When taken letter by letter, A-U-M represents the divine energy (Shakti) united in its three elementary aspects: Bhrahma Shakti (creation), Vishnu Shakti (preservation) and Shiva Shakti (liberation, and/or destruction)."

This is truly remarkable.

[WrongSideof40]

Misconception. The very first verse of the Bible says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." The Bible never indicates in any way, shape or form that the earth is only 6,000 years old. God did create Adam 6,000 years ago though, in one day.

I disagree ..... Science shows us how, religion is philosophy and teaches why. You can't prove or disprove one with the other. Science shows us a world where humans have been around a long, long, time .... But that does not disprove anything, other than missing timelines.

[Minotaur]

When you hear the sound of CMB in the amplified recording http://faculty.washington.edu/jcrame...ng/BBSnd50.wav it is amazing how much it is like the humming sound Of "OM".

Wiki says CMB's discovery is considered a landmark test of the Big Bang model of the universe.
CMB was first predicted in 1948 by Ralph Alpher, and Robert Herman. During the 1970s the consensus was established that the cosmic microwave background is a remnant of the big bang.
So essentially scientists knew of it only in the mid 20th century.

However the Hindus more than 5000 years ago said in the Upanishads (from Wiki)


This is truly remarkable.

It is indeed remarkable. I don't know how they were able to get so close to what we know today. I watch Ancient Aliens The Series (it's like watching a pile-up on the interstate... you know it's wrong to watch but you can't stop yourself), and usually laugh my ass off. But I wonder if there's a kernel of truth that some visitors were in the neighborhood, stopped by and said "hey, we can show you how things work and how to do things, but then you're on your own". Sort of like a modified Prime Directive, which is why we don't have 5,000 year old skyscrapers. Of course our ancestors were not as stupid as some people think. And I think human civilization is far, far older than we think. Göbekli Tepe... 11,000 years old!? Wow!

[2nd_chance]

I disagree ..... Science shows us how, religion is philosophy and teaches why. You can't prove or disprove one with the other. Science shows us a world where humans have been around a long, long, time .... But that does not disprove anything, other than missing timelines.

Disagreement is allowed .

You are correct in that neither side can prove anything. Fortunate for me, I need no proof

[tallguy29]

It is indeed remarkable. I don't know how they were able to get so close to what we know today. I watch Ancient Aliens The Series (it's like watching a pile-up on the interstate... you know it's wrong to watch but you can't stop yourself), and usually laugh my ass off. But I wonder if there's a kernel of truth that some visitors were in the neighborhood, stopped by and said "hey, we can show you how things work and how to do things, but then you're on your own". Sort of like a modified Prime Directive, which is why we don't have 5,000 year old skyscrapers. Of course our ancestors were not as stupid as some people think. And I think human civilization is far, far older than we think. Göbekli Tepe... 11,000 years old!? Wow!

YES...

This BBC video shows both homo erectus and homo sapiens walking the earth in India together and at around the same time.



Homo Erectus went extinct in India probably about 30,000 to 50,000 years ago.

Mahabharata and Ramayana record "vanaras" - the tribe of Hanuman in the epics. Vanaras or apemen were none other than homo erectus; which means the timeline of those epics must have been very many, many thousand years ago. Deduced so (my theory) because those epics happened before homo erectus went extinct in India.
No other culture has recorded that....

[Minotaur]

YES...

This BBC video shows both homo erectus and homo sapiens walking the earth in India together and at around the same time.

I will definitely watch that later. I'm home today, and refuse to watch mindless fluff on tv.

Homo Erectus went extinct in India probably about 30,000 to 50,000 years ago.

Mahabharata and Ramayana record "vanaras" - the tribe of Hanuman in the epics. Vanaras or apemen were none other than homo erectus; which means the timeline of those epics must have been very many, many thousand years ago. Deduced so (my theory) because those epics happened before homo erectus went extinct in India.
No other culture has recorded that....

Yes, Sri Hanuman (my weightlifting and strength patron deity) was just one of a large tribe of Vanaras. Rama was (the form of) a modern human. Don't ask me wtf Ravana was. lol Moreover, Rama is said to have ruled Ayodhya (which still exists) well over 10,000 years ago. South Asia never experienced the ice age, being protected by the Himalayas. A lot of truth is based in legends and myths. But this makes sense and has been put forth by some scholars, much to the chagrin of Hindutvavadis, rabid Hindu Nationalists.

It's further interesting (and makes Hindutvavadis shriek like banshees ) that the Dasavatara (10 avatars) of Vishnu seem to reflect biological evolution:

1. Matsya the fish avatar
2. Kurma the turtle
3. Varaha the boar
4. Narasimha the man-lion (literally nara=man, simha= lion), though I don't know how that fits into biological evolution unless one thinks of half man, half animal as the intermediary step between apes and humans. At any rate, Lord Narasimha is awwwwesome.
5. Vamana the dwarf.
6. Parashurama, a bearded ax-wielding, hot-tempered warrior. Neanderthal?
7, 8, 9. Rama; Krishna; Gautama Buddha. All epitomes of humanity.
10. Kalki, yet to come to cleanse the earth (man finally cleaning up his act?)

This isn't my theory though, it's out there from some scholars. Though while it's interesting, it may be a bit of a reach, even I admit.

[WrongSideof40]

Disagreement is allowed .

You are correct in that neither side can prove anything. Fortunate for me, I need no proof

Excellent! I have all the proof I need, although I would say that Man has really gone out of his way to over complicate a pretty simple message, which has turned me away from institutionalized religion in general. I'm too young to be Dogmatic and I'm not so arrogant to believe that I can know the mind of God.

[tallguy29]

I will definitely watch that later. I'm home today, and refuse to watch mindless fluff on tv.



Yes, Sri Hanuman (my weightlifting and strength patron deity) was just one of a large tribe of Vanaras. Rama was (the form of) a modern human. Don't ask me wtf Ravana was. lol Moreover, Rama is said to have ruled Ayodhya (which still exists) well over 10,000 years ago. South Asia never experienced the ice age, being protected by the Himalayas. A lot of truth is based in legends and myths. But this makes sense and has been put forth by some scholars, much to the chagrin of Hindutvavadis, rabid Hindu Nationalists.

It's further interesting (and makes Hindutvavadis shriek like banshees ) that the Dasavatara (10 avatars) of Vishnu seem to reflect biological evolution:

1. Matsya the fish avatar
2. Kurma the turtle
3. Varaha the boar
4. Narasimha the man-lion (literally nara=man, simha= lion), though I don't know how that fits into biological evolution unless one thinks of half man, half animal as the intermediary step between apes and humans. At any rate, Lord Narasimha is awwwwesome.
5. Vamana the dwarf.
6. Parashurama, a bearded ax-wielding, hot-tempered warrior. Neanderthal?
7, 8, 9. Rama; Krishna; Gautama Buddha. All epitomes of humanity.
10. Kalki, yet to come to cleanse the earth (man finally cleaning up his act?)

This isn't my theory though, it's out there from some scholars. Though while it's interesting, it may be a bit of a reach, even I admit.

Rama meeting Hanuman's tribe signifies the meeting of Homo Sapiens and Homo Erectus, very much like in the BBC documentary, which however shows Homo Sapiens as being primitive.
Non-Hindus would ridicule Hanuman being a monkey when in effect he was a Homo Erectus. They do not realize Hindus were the only people who acknowledged another Hominid species as also having walked the earth, much before science discovered that species.

There is also Jambavan, who belonged to another species. Jamthun village in Ratlam district in Madhya Pradesh has traces of ancient habitation. It is known as the city of Jamvanta or people of Jambavan. Ancient bricks have been found in excavations. There is a water tank of very ancient style.

Ravana was Homo Sapien and probably an ancestor to Dravidians, being a Siva devotee.

And I have heard of how Vishnu Avatars depict evolution of man. Narasimha Avatar must have have been one of the early Hominid species.

[Minotaur]

Firstly, that video is outstanding.

Rama meeting Hanuman's tribe signifies the meeting of Homo Sapiens meeting Homo Erectus, very much like the BBC documentary, which however shows Homo Sapiens being primitive.
Non-Hindus would ridicule Hanuman being a monkey when in effect he was a Homo Erectus. They did not understand Hindus, who must be proud of the fact they were the only people who acknowledged another Hominid species also walked the earth, much before science discovered that.

It's a little disconcerting when Hanuman is referred to as "the monkey god". Per the epics and puranas the Vanaras were quite intelligent, devoted (Hanuman is also the deity of extreme and perfect devotion) and fierce fighters. The video indicated that Homo Erectus formed very tight-knit groups.

There is also Jambavan, who belonged to another species. Jamthun village in Ratlam district in Madhya Pradesh has traces of ancient habitation. It is known as the city of Jamvanta or people of Jambavan. Ancient bricks have been found in excavations. There is a water tank of very ancient style.

Did not know that, but not surprised. But dammit I wish I knew who the IVC people were and what they spoke. That would answer so many questions. It's probably just a matter of time before it's all deciphered.

Ravana was Homo Sapien and probably an ancestor to Dravidians, being a Siva devotee.

Yes, he did receive a boon from Shiva for his devotion, penances and austerities. If I remember correctly, there was a loophole (as there always is, as exquisitely pointed out in the story of Narasimha and Hiranyakashipu... "Oh, it's not nice to try to fool the gods!", apologies to Chiffon Margarine ) at which loophole in Ravana's boon Shiva basically shrugged and said "oh well... "

And I have heard of how Vishnu Avatars depict evolution of man. Narasimha Avatar must have have been one of the early Hominid species.

That's about the only way it fits in.

[Medtreker]

they pulled a few ideas out of their asses and whalah ..... it became a theory. ... and no one ever questioned it......

Do you really think that ??

[2nd_chance]

Someone mentioned in another thread, the History Channel's new show The Bible, which aired Sunday. I only caught a few minutes, but DVR'd it (yet to watch). The scene I saw was Moses and Pharoh. It struck me that Moses, in the face, looked like the Geico caveman lol. So there you have it, a Bible documentary that even an evolutionist could enjoy

[Medtreker]

"The Copernican Revolution refers to the paradigm shift away from the Ptolemaic model of the heavens, which postulated the Earth at the center of the galaxy, towards the heliocentric model with the Sun at the center of our Solar System. It was one of the starting points of the Scientific Revolution of the 16th century."

Here's an example of how our overall understanding of the universe changed. What was understood as fact was eventually understood to be quite different. Now, the "facts" are different from what was understood as "facts" prior.

He didn't just pull these ideas out of his ass, and Yes, it was definetely questioned.

Theories on eveolution are not necessarily just "made up." They're based upon observation.

Theories on the creation of the universe too, are based upon whatever data we have collected.

I'm sure there will more changes in our understanding.

[Medtreker]

Someone mentioned in another thread, the History Channel's new show The Bible, which aired Sunday. I only caught a few minutes, but DVR'd it (yet to watch). The scene I saw was Moses and Pharoh. It struck me that Moses, in the face, looked like the Geico caveman lol. So there you have it, a Bible documentary that even an evolutionist could enjoy

I read a review, said they had good intentions, but the "scripting" was a bit of a let down. They gave it a so so rating.

[2nd_chance]

I read a review, said they had good intentions, but the "scripting" was a bit of a let down. They gave it a so so rating.

Wonder what they meant by scripting? On something like that, I'm just looking for Biblical accuracy.