Yeah. I guess there are some glimmers on those songs. 'God what do you say?' on Marker in the Sand is clearly a shout to God but its tempered by 'God is nowhere to be found, conveniently'. You are right about 'come back', no doubt there is some hope for meeting the deceased friend again 'there must be an open door for you to come back'. I actually sing 'You are' as if to God, it makes sense this way but i'm doubtfull that this is how its meant. I reckon the most positive, spiritually, on the last 2 albums is probably 'Thumbing my way'.
Evolution and Atheism tend to dominate the intellect, but not the spirit. When Ed is absorbed in music, I think he's more open. This is what I am talking about when I keep refering to what Ed said during faithful, and how he withdrew it when the song was over.
Yeah, that is the line that the Ed-is-definitely-an-atheist folks cling to.
I've always interpreted that line to go with the one before it, about both sides killing in His name.
God being nowhere to be found just means he has nothing to do with the killing and these killers. It doesn't necessarily mean that He doesn't exist at all.
That's one way of interpreting it, at least.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
Yeah, that is the line that the Ed-is-definitely-an-atheist folks cling to.
I've always interpreted that line to go with the one before it, about both sides killing in His name.
God being nowhere to be found just means he has nothing to do with the killing and these killers. It doesn't necessarily mean that He doesn't exist at all.
That's one way of interpreting it, at least.
Yes, that's one way....but I always took it to mean that the two sides are "representing god" - killing in his name, so where the hell is he? He's allowing it to happen rather than bring his message of peace and love and stopping it. They're doing for god, so where is god? He's gotta pick a side, doesn't he?
"Leave your hatred upon the cross" is one of my fave lines from that album, too.... Comatose...
Anyway, I just wanted to say that PJ music and a lot of Ed's lyrics speak to my soul and spirit, inspire and disappoint, elate and anger, raise my awareness, and make me want to be a better member of my community (local and global), and god doesn't even enter into it. And honestly, if Ed does or doesn't believe in god - that's not any of my business...He's got some very religious friends (and so do I), but I'm sure he takes it all in stride...(as most would, although one of my friends almost became a non friend when she visited me before my husband and I were married and she requested that he not come over while she was there because she did not approve of pre-marital sex...fine. I approved of it...and since it was my house...well, there was a lovely hotel down the road. She eventually realized that people just have different beliefs).
But Timsinclair, I got from your very first post that you seemed to idolize Ed and used him as a spiritual guide. You must know how much he believes that there are "no fucking messiahs in rock"...He's just a guy with some amazing talent that people can relate to...Just a guy...
But Timsinclair, I got from your very first post that you seemed to idolize Ed and used him as a spiritual guide. You must know how much he believes that there are "no fucking messiahs in rock"...He's just a guy with some amazing talent that people can relate to...Just a guy...
Well what you 'got' from my first post bears no similarity to anything I said. What did I say that indicates that I idolized Ed or used him as a spiritual guide? If this were true I would have been 'guided' into atheism. What I actually said was that I used to be amazed at how ed's lyrics reflected my own search for God, that why it connected so much with me. Have I ever suggested that Ed is some kind of Messiah figure? where do you get this bullshit from? I actually got into trouble for descibing Ed as 'lost'.
What ride? What god? come on people we don't know if there IS anything like that and I side with Eddie. To me he has the right idea. I don't think you should spend your life worrying about that stuff...we have no proof of ANY of it...so PLEASE be open-minded to other ideas. And hey, mabey to you Ed's lost, but to others YOU might be lost.
First of all. Lets be clear, the Bible presnts a universe that is anthropocentric, that is, the whole universe, including the animal Kingdom and the stars, is made for us. I know this is the opposite to the evolutionary view, but please give it some consideration. This means that what man does, effects the whole cosmos, not just the animal kingdom. Adam and Eve's rebellion against God had consequences that are far reaching, in fact because of their sin, the whole universe will one day be destroyed, something put so well by Bono in 'The Fly': 'The Universe exploded cos of one man's lie'. The effect of our rebellion on animals was, I think, to illustrate to us the seriousness of what we had done. After the fall, death and bloodshed have become more and more part of the world. Animals degenerate into carnivores, become extinct, the struggle for survival begins. However, the Bible also makes it clear that when Humankind's relationship with God is restored, the earth will have one last period of peace (1000 years) wherein the effects of the fall will be reversed and 'the wolf shall lie down with the lamb'.
i have considered it. and ive discarded it. i am well aware how anthropocentric the bible is. and i wouldnt expect anything less from something written by mankind. mankind has always thought himself superior to the rest of life on earth and thusly has always put himself outside nature. his concern is primarily for himself at the expense of all the rest of nature. imo he is wrong to do this and it will come back to bite him in the arse. the earth will not be destroyed by mankinds destruction and lack of foresight, she will regenerate long after mankind has ceased to exist.
Sharp teeth and claws do not mean that something is a carnivore. Look at the razor sharp teeth of a fruit bat or a giant Panda, yet they are completely vegetarian. My pet Iguana Vinny tears strips off my wrists with his talons and another iguana once bit a chunk out of my back through two shirts!! yet iguana's are vegetarians. Nevertheless, animals have the ability to adapt to different food souces in order to survive, we think of Pirhana's as frenzied carnivors but most kids of Pirhana's are vegetarian, only a couple of types have been forced onto eating flesh. I expect you are thinking, well isnt that evolution then? well no! Evolution requires the generation of new genetic data, adaption does not. Adaption is the ability of a species to vary it's size, colour, etc. by selecting (natural selection) from genes that it already posesses, so as to meet the challenges of a new situation. Ameba to man evolution requires new genetic data for natural selection to use, there is no known mechanism that can produce this.
Now, before you start throwing examples at me, I know that many animals have elaborate defence/attack systems (DAS) that seem to be designed for only one purpose. I am also aware that, if all these systems came about by adaption, my argument against evolution is seriously undermined. I dont have the answer for each case, some of this systems could have had a different purpose that we cannot imagine, the spider's web for example was always thought to be purely for catching insects until someone discovered a species that catches and eats pollen in its web. The sharp teeth and claws of a Lion or a T-rex, could have been origionally designed for cutting through tough vegetation, only becoming weapons after the fall. But even if all these DAS systems did not have another original purpose, this is still not inconsistent with the Biblical narritive. This is because the Bible says that God had already planned the crucifixion of Jesus 'before the foundation of the world', therefore he already knew that Humankind would rebel against him before he made us. With such forknowledge, God may well have included DAS systems in the genetic code of each kind of animal to be used when necessary. The instructions for these systems could have been included in a latent or masked form and only began being expressed after the fall in Eden.
iguanas and pandas, both giant and red, are arboreal. those sharp claws are for climbing.
i see adaptation as evolution. i see this most prominantly in the flightless cormorants of the galapagos islands. having no predators to escape from, they have lost the defensive ability of flight. when i see them darting through the water i can not help but see parallels between them and penguins. it definitely makes me stop and think of what penguins were like once upon a time.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Hi Collin
Sorry to hear about your accident. Hope you are ok now.
I understand what you are saying, but none of the people who came up to you and told you what they had heard were eyewitnesses (primary sources), hence no serious historian would give them any credibility. Luke says that his sources were eyewitnesses, that is the difference. I think you also underestimate the accuracy of the Jewish scribal tradition. Before 1947, the oldest Biblical texts we had were those of the masorite scribes, the dead sea scrolls are at least 1000 years older. Did this show that the texts had 'evolved' over time? No.
The Bible is a compilation of lots of different kinds of literature, history, prophecy, poetry etc. Some of these genres are more from God, and some more from man. Prophecy, for example begins with: 'Thus says the LORD:', while Paul sometimes says: 'Not the Lord but I say:'.In writing his gospel Luke was allowed to use his intellect. As a believer, I also think that Luke had a heightened sense of discernment as he evaluated the sources. That is a faith position, but even if you dont share it, his work should be taken as seriously as any other historical writing.
Regarding the utube videos, Very amusing but a gross characterisation of God and a misleading oversimplification of reality. The notion that the only evidence for God is the Bible is wrong and the suggestion that God requires belief in him on Biblical ground alone is false. Romans Ch 1 clearly says why, when we meet him, we will be short of excuses, and it does not even mention the Bible:
'For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.'
The evidence of design is all around us, if we have 'eyes to see', if we have not been blinded by naturalism. The second video uses 'scientist' to mean 'evolutionists' and ignores that many, many, scientists do not agree with Darwin, As I said before, there is a list of 400 pHD scientist who do not agree on the Discovery Institute website.
Peace.
I will begin by saying that I am humbly impressed with your knowledge of the Bible. I hope to learn more of it as I have been studying it for about four years.
Whenever anyone has any doubts, mostly myself, I look to Paul. He killed Christians and he also had a full knowledge of the Jewish faith. He didn't even know Jesus, but instead met Him as a spirit on the road to Demascus (spell check anyone??). For him to go through all he did and not waiver in his faith, surely would tell me He is the real thing.
Everyone has their own journey to go through and all are entitled to their own point of view. And while I would not argue with anyone to tell them they are wrong, I expect the same courtesy.
I don't know about this whole Eddie Vedder/God thing. Personally, it is his own right to decide. And he may change his mind, he may never.
I respect him as an artist and since I am not looking for spiritual guidance from him, his views can be his own, not mine. I may point out though that his writing is indeed a gift and to whom you could credit is your own decision. I credit mine with God. What I do with it is mine, though.
Baby, You Wouldn't Last a Minute on The Creek......
Together we will float like angels.........
In the moment that you left the room, the album started skipping, goodbye to beauty shared with the ones that you love.........
Yeah. I guess there are some glimmers on those songs. 'God what do you say?' on Marker in the Sand is clearly a shout to God but its tempered by 'God is nowhere to be found, conveniently'. You are right about 'come back', no doubt there is some hope for meeting the deceased friend again 'there must be an open door for you to come back'. I actually sing 'You are' as if to God, it makes sense this way but i'm doubtfull that this is how its meant. I reckon the most positive, spiritually, on the last 2 albums is probably 'Thumbing my way'.
Evolution and Atheism tend to dominate the intellect, but not the spirit. When Ed is absorbed in music, I think he's more open. This is what I am talking about when I keep refering to what Ed said during faithful, and how he withdrew it when the song was over.
music is all about the spirit. it really requires no massive thought for it to move you.
marker in the sand imo is about how in conflict both sides claim God is on their side. and yet he fails to reveal himself. how can this be? if both sides claim that God is on their side they cant be both right, can they?
those undecided.. neednt have faith to be free
i take this line to mean that those who havent found the answer to whatever the question is needent think that salvation will be found only in God. that everyone finds their freedom in what sets them free. and that isnt necessarily religion as we know it, or even religion at all.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
music is all about the spirit. it really requires no massive thought for it to move you.
marker in the sand imo is about how in conflict both sides claim God is on their side. and yet he fails to reveal himself. how can this be? if both sides claim that God is on their side they cant be both right, can they?
those undecided.. neednt have faith to be free
i take this line to mean that those who havent found the answer to whatever the question is needent think that salvation will be found only in God. that everyone finds their freedom in what sets them free. and that isnt necessarily religion as we know it, or even religion at all.
No, I agree. Because somewhere in the deep end of the way we see life and the world has to balance us or it will destroy us. I have seen both believers and non believers who are too bent in their own thoughts to get anywhere past them. I feel God is THE GOD, Jesus, is His son, and I have His spirit in me should I allow Him in. Other than that, I am on my own and if I don't use what He gave me productively, then I am to blame not Him.
Baby, You Wouldn't Last a Minute on The Creek......
Together we will float like angels.........
In the moment that you left the room, the album started skipping, goodbye to beauty shared with the ones that you love.........
iguanas and pandas, both giant and red, are arboreal. those sharp claws are for climbing.
i see adaptation as evolution. i see this most prominantly in the flightless cormorants of the galapagos islands. having no predators to escape from, they have lost the defensive ability of flight. when i see them darting through the water i can not help but see parallels between them and penguins. it definitely makes me stop and think of what penguins were like once upon a time.
Think about your examples of evolution in action.Have flightless bird gained any new genetic information? No. Many kind of birds can use their wings for swimming as well as flying, but flighless birds have lost the ability to use them for flight. Losing a copy of Moby Dick out of a hole in my bag doesn't require intelligence. Writing Moby Dick from scratch does.
I will begin by saying that I am humbly impressed with your knowledge of the Bible. I hope to learn more of it as I have been studying it for about four years.
Whenever anyone has any doubts, mostly myself, I look to Paul. He killed Christians and he also had a full knowledge of the Jewish faith. He didn't even know Jesus, but instead met Him as a spirit on the road to Demascus (spell check anyone??). For him to go through all he did and not waiver in his faith, surely would tell me He is the real thing.
Everyone has their own journey to go through and all are entitled to their own point of view. And while I would not argue with anyone to tell them they are wrong, I expect the same courtesy.
I don't know about this whole Eddie Vedder/God thing. Personally, it is his own right to decide. And he may change his mind, he may never.
I respect him as an artist and since I am not looking for spiritual guidance from him, his views can be his own, not mine. I may point out though that his writing is indeed a gift and to whom you could credit is your own decision. I credit mine with God. What I do with it is mine, though.
Hi.
Nice to hear another friendly voice. Thats cool if you don't want to engage in argument with atheists but I think argument can be a good thing. Its the only way differing views can interact and gain knowledge of eachother.
music is all about the spirit. it really requires no massive thought for it to move you.
marker in the sand imo is about how in conflict both sides claim God is on their side. and yet he fails to reveal himself. how can this be? if both sides claim that God is on their side they cant be both right, can they?
those undecided.. neednt have faith to be free
i take this line to mean that those who havent found the answer to whatever the question is needent think that salvation will be found only in God. that everyone finds their freedom in what sets them free. and that isnt necessarily religion as we know it, or even religion at all.
Science doesn't, but Evolution does. Evolution is used to justify abortion, genocide, racism etc. There is evolutionary psychology, evolutionary religion, it tells us who we are, where we came from and where we are going. It tells us that we have no-one to answer too so we can create our own morality. It tells us that it is ok to trample on other to suceed. It's evolution baby!!
It indeed tries to tell us who we are, where we came from etc. This is based on studies, research... Not a book, written by man. It's not a religion, though.
Indeed, we can create our own morality. It doesn't tell us it's ok to trample on others to succeed. I don't know where you got that.
Yes, I agree that God is not readily available to be observed and experimented on. However the natural world is, and science should be willing to look for signs of design - which would infer that a higher intelligence exists.
They should "look" for signs of design and they shouldn't look for signs of evolution. They should look for data and study it.
I say 'should' also because, not only are these events unobservabe, they are highly mysterious since they seem more and more to defy any naturalistic explanation. the beggining of the universe does this because the laws of physics dictate that matter/energy CANNOT be created or destroyed by natural processes, hence we should consider that the event may have had a supernatural cause.
I don't think those events seem "more and more to defy any naturalistic explanation" at all. New theories suggest that the universe actually did come out of nothing, more or less. It's interesting and something we should definitely look into.
OK, if the earth and the universe were created by god, who created god? Your argument is that things are so complex that they need a creator, that matter or energy cannot be created... Yet the creator himself, probably the most complex, intelligent being, exists without cause or end. Where did it come from?
No, I do not believe in those mythical creatures because they do not form part of any rational, defensible, worldview that can take account of what we observe in the world.
I think they are. I don't see how Greek mythology is any different than christian mythology.
You have no proof whatsoever god exists, and there's no proof whatsoever these creatures exists, or Ra or Zeus etc. exist.
Don't you think science should be looking for evidence that the Greek gods created the earth and universe, or the Egyptian gods, or Slavic gods...
You don't believe in those because they don't fit your biblical worldview. Let me paraphrase your own words:
"This is faith, and once you accept the [biblical] narritive, all things that are not strictly biblical (ie other mythical creatures from other religions) become, not just unproven, but ridiculous - not even worthy of consideration."
So, I sincerely hope you'd explore all those possibilities too when you're looking for evidence of a intelligent designer.
A lot of people would be happy if I could prove the existence of Angels, a lot of people would also be happy if you could disprove it because if God and his angels dont exist, we can do as we please-there is no sin, as Ed says on 'Push me pull me' "if there were no Angels would there be no sin?"
There is no sin now. At least not according to me and so many other people. What's your point?
Think about your examples of evolution in action.Have flightless bird gained any new genetic information? No. Many kind of birds can use their wings for swimming as well as flying, but flighless birds have lost the ability to use them for flight. Losing a copy of Moby Dick out of a hole in my bag doesn't require intelligence. Writing Moby Dick from scratch does.
i dont know. im not talking about birds using their wings for both flight AND swimming. the flightless cormorants CAN NOT fly AND swim. they CAN NOT fly AT ALL. perhaps with subsequent generations the genetic information of these cormorants will not contain the ability to fly because of this adaptation. only time will tell.
and losing a book through a hole in your bag has nothing to do with YOUR genetic makeup, your intelligence, or lack thereof. it comes down to pure negligence on your part from either not maintaining your bag or by being ignorant of the hole in your bag.
the flightless cormorants have not lost their ability to fly through negligence or ignorance but because they no longer require this skill for their survival. your analogy is flawed.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Science doesn't, but Evolution does. Evolution is used to justify abortion, genocide, racism etc. There is evolutionary psychology, evolutionary religion, it tells us who we are, where we came from and where we are going. It tells us that we have no-one to answer too so we can create our own morality. It tells us that it is ok to trample on other to suceed. It's evolution baby!!
excuse me? where is and when was evolution used to justify abortion, genocide and racism.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
some of the most spiritual people I know would not describe themselves as "disciples of god," me included.
remember that one of Ed's favorite who songs is "The Seeker."
(If someone already mentioned that, all apologies.)
Once again everything is open to interpretation but I believe The Seeker was looking for LSD (or some form of psychotropics). Severed Hand is more closely related to The Seeker more than God IMO.
In my own spiritual journey Ed has been a constant voice, a co-searcher of truth. I used to be amazed how new albums seemed to reflect my own searchings. But now we are adrift, worlds apart. From Ten to Yield, Ed's lyrics beat a genuine, honest, and real, path to God. After the metaphysical groping of vitalogy and no code,Yield's affirmation of faith and heavy allusions to the crucifixion of Jesus in Given to fly, made it the the soundtrack to my own recent submission to God. However, although remnants remained on Binaural, it soon became clear that Ed had seen the truth, counted the cost, and turned back. Now I am dismayed by the anti-Christian videos on tenclubs activism page and the 'God is a delusion' messages in Ed's lyrics. I feel gutted that ed did not come along for the ride, he's missed the greatest discovery of all - Life as a disciple of Jesus. I feel like I've lost a friend, am I the only one who feels this way?
I believe in Jack White. I guess that makes me a disciple of Awesome.
"restless soul, enjoy your youth,
like Muhammad hits the truth
if you hate something, don't you do it too"
I don't know, I think everyone is looking too deep into things. Because he mentioned Jesus, or Muhammad, or Shiva or whatever doesn't mean he believes in them, is looking for them etc.
"restless soul, enjoy your youth,
like Muhammad hits the truth
if you hate something, don't you do it too"
I don't know, I think everyone is looking too deep into things. Because he mentioned Jesus, or Muhammad, or Shiva or whatever doesn't mean he believes in them, is looking for them etc.
i dont know. im not talking about birds using their wings for both flight AND swimming. the flightless cormorants CAN NOT fly AND swim. they CAN NOT fly AT ALL. perhaps with subsequent generations the genetic information of these cormorants will not contain the ability to fly because of this adaptation. only time will tell.
and losing a book through a hole in your bag has nothing to do with YOUR genetic makeup, your intelligence, or lack thereof. it comes down to pure negligence on your part from either not maintaining your bag or by being ignorant of the hole in your bag.
the flightless cormorants have not lost their ability to fly through negligence or ignorance but because they no longer require this skill for their survival. your analogy is flawed.
I am aware that fightless cormorants cannot fly, it seems kind of self-evident. I think you are missing my point entirely. I was not trying to say anything about HOW genetic information is lost (i am aware that Cormorants did'nt lose it from a hole their bag), that is why my analogy bears no relation to that point. My analolgy was only supposed to make one point, and I think it did it quite adequately. The point is that the LOSS of flight does NOT demonstrate evolution since it is a LOSS of genetic information through harmfull mutations, devolution if you like. It does NOT demonstrate the ability of animals to generate new genetic data, so as to develop an entirely new organ or limb, there is zero evidence for this. Flightless birds demonstrate that mutations are a largely destuctive, and NEVER creative, force. Many diseases are caused by mutations, not a single one has ever been observed to add anything new to the gene pool.Creation requires intelligent input - creativity, destruction does not.
"restless soul, enjoy your youth,
like Muhammad hits the truth
if you hate something, don't you do it too"
I don't know, I think everyone is looking too deep into things. Because he mentioned Jesus, or Muhammad, or Shiva or whatever doesn't mean he believes in them, is looking for them etc.
Maybe it just doesn't mean anything at all.
Nice try Collin. This is the only time that Ed might appear to mention a religious figure other than Jesus, however, dont you think he might be talking about another Muhammad who is rather famous for 'hitting' things - Muhammad Ali.
I am aware that fightless cormorants cannot fly, it seems kind of self-evident. I think you are missing my point entirely. I was not trying to say anything about HOW genetic information is lost (i am aware that Cormorants did'nt lose it from a hole their bag), that is why my analogy bears no relation to that point. My analolgy was only supposed to make one point, and I think it did it quite adequately. The point is that the LOSS of flight does NOT demonstrate evolution since it is a LOSS of genetic information through harmfull mutations, devolution if you like. It does NOT demonstrate the ability of animals to generate new genetic data, so as to develop an entirely new organ or limb, there is zero evidence for this. Flightless birds demonstrate that mutations are a largely destuctive, and NEVER creative, force. Many diseases are caused by mutations, not a single one has ever been observed to add anything new to the gene pool.Creation requires intelligent input - creativity, destruction does not.
Listen, I don't have a dog in this fight, however I do find it mildly entertaining (trust me, anything is more entertaining then Microsoft Excel). Also, I really don't know shit about anything and thought perhaps you could better explain. I'm not sure how you would define evolution. Why would the loss of flight constitute devolution of a particular species? Just because genetic information is lost doesn't necessarily mean it was a destructive event. And I believe, as far as biology is concerned, that the definition of evolution allows this to take place. Evolution doesn't predict that species will only evolve "upwards", that is gain traits or at least maintain them at a certain point. Instead it calls for genetic changes (whether through positive or negative adaptation). Once again, not attempting to debate evolution and creationism, just that the loss or "destructive" mutation is not particularly strong evidence it seems. Either way, I bet Bob Dylan knows the answer, but he'd never tell.
Nice try Collin. This is the only time that Ed might appear to mention a religious figure other than Jesus, however, dont you think he might be talking about another Muhammad who is rather famous for 'hitting' things - Muhammad Ali.
No, I think he's referring to the prophet. I'm not the only one, by the way. Look it up on this very forum, there was a poll, the majority thought it was about the prophet.
And let's not forget the pearl jam logo with part of Turkey's flag in it. And the Get Right t-shirt.
My point is you see what you want to see. A communist will find plenty of evidence that pearl jam supports communism, a christian might find evidence Ed was considering their god, a muslim might find the same... And so on...
I mean four, five virgins and a pelican, perhaps Ed was singing about the virgins awaiting him in the after life. Don't know about the pelican, though.
I am aware that fightless cormorants cannot fly, it seems kind of self-evident. I think you are missing my point entirely. I was not trying to say anything about HOW genetic information is lost (i am aware that Cormorants did'nt lose it from a hole their bag), that is why my analogy bears no relation to that point. My analolgy was only supposed to make one point, and I think it did it quite adequately. The point is that the LOSS of flight does NOT demonstrate evolution since it is a LOSS of genetic information through harmfull mutations, devolution if you like. It does NOT demonstrate the ability of animals to generate new genetic data, so as to develop an entirely new organ or limb, there is zero evidence for this. Flightless birds demonstrate that mutations are a largely destuctive, and NEVER creative, force. Many diseases are caused by mutations, not a single one has ever been observed to add anything new to the gene pool.Creation requires intelligent input - creativity, destruction does not.
excuse me? where is and when was evolution used to justify abortion, genocide and racism.
The application of Darwinism to the human race is known as Eugenics, and was developed by Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton. In 1907 Galton founded the Eugenics society, describing his theory as: ‘the science of improving stock….to give the more suitable races a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable’. Surely anyone can see that this evolutionary logic lies behind the Nazi Holocaust. Dr. Ernst Haeckel, a contemporary of Darwin and an early convert to his theory also developed the theory, saying that ‘politics is applied biology’, a quote used by Nazi propagandists to justify many of their actions.
As well as being central to Nazi ideology, Eugenics has been an essential doctrine of the pro-choice movement. Pro-choice heroines Marie Stopes and Margaret Sanger were both committed eugenicists. In fact Marie Stopes, who founded the largest worldwide abortion provider (Marie Stopes International), along with the first UK family planning clinic, called for the sterilization of the ‘lowest and worst members of the community’ whose ‘stunted and warped infants’ were burdensome to the ‘classes above them’. Likewise, Margaret Sanger, founder and president of the International Planned Parenthood Association, referred to certain segments of society as ‘human waste that should never have been born.’ Sanger also justified infanticide, saying: ‘The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.’
Barbara Burke expounds this Darwinian thinking in her article in Science magazine:
‘Among some animal species, infant killing appears to be a natural practice. Could it be natural for humans too, a trait inherited from our primate ancestors? Charles Darwin noted in The Descent of Man that infanticide has been 'probably the most important of all checks on population growth throughout most of human history.’
There is also a more specific way that Darwinism has affected our attitudes to abortion, the so-called ‘Biogenetic law’, otherwise known as the theory of ‘Embryonic recapitulation’. Haeckel’s theory proposed that during its 9 months in the womb a human embryo relives human kind’s evolutionary history, thus desecrating any perceived sanctity of embryonic life by de-humanizing it. If Haeckel were correct, a fetus would only become human shortly before it’s birth, prior to this it would be more like a fish or amphibian, depending on the stage of the pregnancy. Haeckel’s drawings have been proven to be completely false, the Biogenetic law is a load of horse-shit, yet the drawing still appear in school textbooks.
Hitler was not an atheist. Just thought I'd mention that.
What we do know about Hitler is that he was a liar. Sometimes he said he was a Catholic, sometimes he said that Christianity was the root of all evil. I know we cant be sure of the truth here but his pro-Christianity statements, like:
“I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” and,
“ Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
were made early on (early 20's) when he was trying to get elected in a largely Christian country. However, when in power, I think he showed his true colours, saying things like:
"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....the heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."
I know Hitler had an obsession with the occult and reincarnation too, so you may well be right that he wasn't, strictly speaking, an atheist. However, he was, without any doubt, an evolutionist, and evolutionary thinking was clearly behind his racist ideas about the highly developed arian race having the duty to stamp out the weak Jews and Negroes. This is pure Eugenics, evolution in practice.
I don't think those events seem "more and more to defy any naturalistic explanation" at all. New theories suggest that the universe actually did come out of nothing, more or less. It's interesting and something we should definitely look into.
More or less?
There are theories that suggest all sorts of things, there is room for a lot of conjecture cos we cant observe it or repeat it. You say we should look into it but should we consider non-natural causes?
OK, if the earth and the universe were created by god, who created god? Your argument is that things are so complex that they need a creator, that matter or energy cannot be created... Yet the creator himself, probably the most complex, intelligent being, exists without cause or end. Where did it come from?
the universe is basically made of three raw materials, time, matter/energy, and space. All three were created simultaneously by God. God is not subject to time because God created time. If God is not subject to time, concepts like 'beggining' and 'end' do not apply. These concepts apply only in a time/matter/space universe. It follows that a human mind, being subject to time, is unable to adequately comprehend anything that exists outside the time/space universe. All the gods of greece, rome, India etc are personifications of nature, they are spacio-temporal. Only the God of the Bible is fully transcendant.
Comments
Evolution and Atheism tend to dominate the intellect, but not the spirit. When Ed is absorbed in music, I think he's more open. This is what I am talking about when I keep refering to what Ed said during faithful, and how he withdrew it when the song was over.
Yeah, that is the line that the Ed-is-definitely-an-atheist folks cling to.
I've always interpreted that line to go with the one before it, about both sides killing in His name.
God being nowhere to be found just means he has nothing to do with the killing and these killers. It doesn't necessarily mean that He doesn't exist at all.
That's one way of interpreting it, at least.
for the least they could possibly do
Yes, that's one way....but I always took it to mean that the two sides are "representing god" - killing in his name, so where the hell is he? He's allowing it to happen rather than bring his message of peace and love and stopping it. They're doing for god, so where is god? He's gotta pick a side, doesn't he?
"Leave your hatred upon the cross" is one of my fave lines from that album, too.... Comatose...
Anyway, I just wanted to say that PJ music and a lot of Ed's lyrics speak to my soul and spirit, inspire and disappoint, elate and anger, raise my awareness, and make me want to be a better member of my community (local and global), and god doesn't even enter into it. And honestly, if Ed does or doesn't believe in god - that's not any of my business...He's got some very religious friends (and so do I), but I'm sure he takes it all in stride...(as most would, although one of my friends almost became a non friend when she visited me before my husband and I were married and she requested that he not come over while she was there because she did not approve of pre-marital sex...fine. I approved of it...and since it was my house...well, there was a lovely hotel down the road. She eventually realized that people just have different beliefs).
But Timsinclair, I got from your very first post that you seemed to idolize Ed and used him as a spiritual guide. You must know how much he believes that there are "no fucking messiahs in rock"...He's just a guy with some amazing talent that people can relate to...Just a guy...
Well what you 'got' from my first post bears no similarity to anything I said. What did I say that indicates that I idolized Ed or used him as a spiritual guide? If this were true I would have been 'guided' into atheism. What I actually said was that I used to be amazed at how ed's lyrics reflected my own search for God, that why it connected so much with me. Have I ever suggested that Ed is some kind of Messiah figure? where do you get this bullshit from? I actually got into trouble for descibing Ed as 'lost'.
Another one: Man of the Hour ... it's not goodbye ... it's goodbye for now.
for the least they could possibly do
i have considered it. and ive discarded it. i am well aware how anthropocentric the bible is. and i wouldnt expect anything less from something written by mankind. mankind has always thought himself superior to the rest of life on earth and thusly has always put himself outside nature. his concern is primarily for himself at the expense of all the rest of nature. imo he is wrong to do this and it will come back to bite him in the arse. the earth will not be destroyed by mankinds destruction and lack of foresight, she will regenerate long after mankind has ceased to exist.
iguanas and pandas, both giant and red, are arboreal. those sharp claws are for climbing.
i see adaptation as evolution. i see this most prominantly in the flightless cormorants of the galapagos islands. having no predators to escape from, they have lost the defensive ability of flight. when i see them darting through the water i can not help but see parallels between them and penguins. it definitely makes me stop and think of what penguins were like once upon a time.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I will begin by saying that I am humbly impressed with your knowledge of the Bible. I hope to learn more of it as I have been studying it for about four years.
Whenever anyone has any doubts, mostly myself, I look to Paul. He killed Christians and he also had a full knowledge of the Jewish faith. He didn't even know Jesus, but instead met Him as a spirit on the road to Demascus (spell check anyone??). For him to go through all he did and not waiver in his faith, surely would tell me He is the real thing.
Everyone has their own journey to go through and all are entitled to their own point of view. And while I would not argue with anyone to tell them they are wrong, I expect the same courtesy.
I don't know about this whole Eddie Vedder/God thing. Personally, it is his own right to decide. And he may change his mind, he may never.
I respect him as an artist and since I am not looking for spiritual guidance from him, his views can be his own, not mine. I may point out though that his writing is indeed a gift and to whom you could credit is your own decision. I credit mine with God. What I do with it is mine, though.
Together we will float like angels.........
In the moment that you left the room, the album started skipping, goodbye to beauty shared with the ones that you love.........
music is all about the spirit. it really requires no massive thought for it to move you.
marker in the sand imo is about how in conflict both sides claim God is on their side. and yet he fails to reveal himself. how can this be? if both sides claim that God is on their side they cant be both right, can they?
those undecided.. neednt have faith to be free
i take this line to mean that those who havent found the answer to whatever the question is needent think that salvation will be found only in God. that everyone finds their freedom in what sets them free. and that isnt necessarily religion as we know it, or even religion at all.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
No, I agree. Because somewhere in the deep end of the way we see life and the world has to balance us or it will destroy us. I have seen both believers and non believers who are too bent in their own thoughts to get anywhere past them. I feel God is THE GOD, Jesus, is His son, and I have His spirit in me should I allow Him in. Other than that, I am on my own and if I don't use what He gave me productively, then I am to blame not Him.
Together we will float like angels.........
In the moment that you left the room, the album started skipping, goodbye to beauty shared with the ones that you love.........
Think about your examples of evolution in action.Have flightless bird gained any new genetic information? No. Many kind of birds can use their wings for swimming as well as flying, but flighless birds have lost the ability to use them for flight. Losing a copy of Moby Dick out of a hole in my bag doesn't require intelligence. Writing Moby Dick from scratch does.
Hi.
Nice to hear another friendly voice. Thats cool if you don't want to engage in argument with atheists but I think argument can be a good thing. Its the only way differing views can interact and gain knowledge of eachother.
p.s. its spelt Damascus.
Yeah, sound about right.
naděje umírá poslední
It indeed tries to tell us who we are, where we came from etc. This is based on studies, research... Not a book, written by man. It's not a religion, though.
Indeed, we can create our own morality. It doesn't tell us it's ok to trample on others to succeed. I don't know where you got that.
They should "look" for signs of design and they shouldn't look for signs of evolution. They should look for data and study it.
I don't think those events seem "more and more to defy any naturalistic explanation" at all. New theories suggest that the universe actually did come out of nothing, more or less. It's interesting and something we should definitely look into.
OK, if the earth and the universe were created by god, who created god? Your argument is that things are so complex that they need a creator, that matter or energy cannot be created... Yet the creator himself, probably the most complex, intelligent being, exists without cause or end. Where did it come from?
I think they are. I don't see how Greek mythology is any different than christian mythology.
You have no proof whatsoever god exists, and there's no proof whatsoever these creatures exists, or Ra or Zeus etc. exist.
Don't you think science should be looking for evidence that the Greek gods created the earth and universe, or the Egyptian gods, or Slavic gods...
You don't believe in those because they don't fit your biblical worldview. Let me paraphrase your own words:
"This is faith, and once you accept the [biblical] narritive, all things that are not strictly biblical (ie other mythical creatures from other religions) become, not just unproven, but ridiculous - not even worthy of consideration."
So, I sincerely hope you'd explore all those possibilities too when you're looking for evidence of a intelligent designer.
There is no sin now. At least not according to me and so many other people. What's your point?
naděje umírá poslední
i dont know. im not talking about birds using their wings for both flight AND swimming. the flightless cormorants CAN NOT fly AND swim. they CAN NOT fly AT ALL. perhaps with subsequent generations the genetic information of these cormorants will not contain the ability to fly because of this adaptation. only time will tell.
and losing a book through a hole in your bag has nothing to do with YOUR genetic makeup, your intelligence, or lack thereof. it comes down to pure negligence on your part from either not maintaining your bag or by being ignorant of the hole in your bag.
the flightless cormorants have not lost their ability to fly through negligence or ignorance but because they no longer require this skill for their survival. your analogy is flawed.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
excuse me? where is and when was evolution used to justify abortion, genocide and racism.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Hitler was not an atheist. Just thought I'd mention that.
naděje umírá poslední
Once again everything is open to interpretation but I believe The Seeker was looking for LSD (or some form of psychotropics). Severed Hand is more closely related to The Seeker more than God IMO.
I believe in Jack White. I guess that makes me a disciple of Awesome.
like Muhammad hits the truth
if you hate something, don't you do it too"
I don't know, I think everyone is looking too deep into things. Because he mentioned Jesus, or Muhammad, or Shiva or whatever doesn't mean he believes in them, is looking for them etc.
Maybe it just doesn't mean anything at all.
naděje umírá poslední
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
I am aware that fightless cormorants cannot fly, it seems kind of self-evident. I think you are missing my point entirely. I was not trying to say anything about HOW genetic information is lost (i am aware that Cormorants did'nt lose it from a hole their bag), that is why my analogy bears no relation to that point. My analolgy was only supposed to make one point, and I think it did it quite adequately. The point is that the LOSS of flight does NOT demonstrate evolution since it is a LOSS of genetic information through harmfull mutations, devolution if you like. It does NOT demonstrate the ability of animals to generate new genetic data, so as to develop an entirely new organ or limb, there is zero evidence for this. Flightless birds demonstrate that mutations are a largely destuctive, and NEVER creative, force. Many diseases are caused by mutations, not a single one has ever been observed to add anything new to the gene pool.Creation requires intelligent input - creativity, destruction does not.
Nice try Collin. This is the only time that Ed might appear to mention a religious figure other than Jesus, however, dont you think he might be talking about another Muhammad who is rather famous for 'hitting' things - Muhammad Ali.
Listen, I don't have a dog in this fight, however I do find it mildly entertaining (trust me, anything is more entertaining then Microsoft Excel). Also, I really don't know shit about anything and thought perhaps you could better explain. I'm not sure how you would define evolution. Why would the loss of flight constitute devolution of a particular species? Just because genetic information is lost doesn't necessarily mean it was a destructive event. And I believe, as far as biology is concerned, that the definition of evolution allows this to take place. Evolution doesn't predict that species will only evolve "upwards", that is gain traits or at least maintain them at a certain point. Instead it calls for genetic changes (whether through positive or negative adaptation). Once again, not attempting to debate evolution and creationism, just that the loss or "destructive" mutation is not particularly strong evidence it seems. Either way, I bet Bob Dylan knows the answer, but he'd never tell.
No, I think he's referring to the prophet. I'm not the only one, by the way. Look it up on this very forum, there was a poll, the majority thought it was about the prophet.
And let's not forget the pearl jam logo with part of Turkey's flag in it. And the Get Right t-shirt.
http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/categories/music/136903.html
My point is you see what you want to see. A communist will find plenty of evidence that pearl jam supports communism, a christian might find evidence Ed was considering their god, a muslim might find the same... And so on...
I mean four, five virgins and a pelican, perhaps Ed was singing about the virgins awaiting him in the after life. Don't know about the pelican, though.
naděje umírá poslední
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#observe
naděje umírá poslední
The application of Darwinism to the human race is known as Eugenics, and was developed by Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton. In 1907 Galton founded the Eugenics society, describing his theory as: ‘the science of improving stock….to give the more suitable races a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable’. Surely anyone can see that this evolutionary logic lies behind the Nazi Holocaust. Dr. Ernst Haeckel, a contemporary of Darwin and an early convert to his theory also developed the theory, saying that ‘politics is applied biology’, a quote used by Nazi propagandists to justify many of their actions.
As well as being central to Nazi ideology, Eugenics has been an essential doctrine of the pro-choice movement. Pro-choice heroines Marie Stopes and Margaret Sanger were both committed eugenicists. In fact Marie Stopes, who founded the largest worldwide abortion provider (Marie Stopes International), along with the first UK family planning clinic, called for the sterilization of the ‘lowest and worst members of the community’ whose ‘stunted and warped infants’ were burdensome to the ‘classes above them’. Likewise, Margaret Sanger, founder and president of the International Planned Parenthood Association, referred to certain segments of society as ‘human waste that should never have been born.’ Sanger also justified infanticide, saying: ‘The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.’
Barbara Burke expounds this Darwinian thinking in her article in Science magazine:
‘Among some animal species, infant killing appears to be a natural practice. Could it be natural for humans too, a trait inherited from our primate ancestors? Charles Darwin noted in The Descent of Man that infanticide has been 'probably the most important of all checks on population growth throughout most of human history.’
There is also a more specific way that Darwinism has affected our attitudes to abortion, the so-called ‘Biogenetic law’, otherwise known as the theory of ‘Embryonic recapitulation’. Haeckel’s theory proposed that during its 9 months in the womb a human embryo relives human kind’s evolutionary history, thus desecrating any perceived sanctity of embryonic life by de-humanizing it. If Haeckel were correct, a fetus would only become human shortly before it’s birth, prior to this it would be more like a fish or amphibian, depending on the stage of the pregnancy. Haeckel’s drawings have been proven to be completely false, the Biogenetic law is a load of horse-shit, yet the drawing still appear in school textbooks.
What we do know about Hitler is that he was a liar. Sometimes he said he was a Catholic, sometimes he said that Christianity was the root of all evil. I know we cant be sure of the truth here but his pro-Christianity statements, like:
“I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” and,
“ Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
were made early on (early 20's) when he was trying to get elected in a largely Christian country. However, when in power, I think he showed his true colours, saying things like:
"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....the heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."
I know Hitler had an obsession with the occult and reincarnation too, so you may well be right that he wasn't, strictly speaking, an atheist. However, he was, without any doubt, an evolutionist, and evolutionary thinking was clearly behind his racist ideas about the highly developed arian race having the duty to stamp out the weak Jews and Negroes. This is pure Eugenics, evolution in practice.
More or less?
There are theories that suggest all sorts of things, there is room for a lot of conjecture cos we cant observe it or repeat it. You say we should look into it but should we consider non-natural causes?
the universe is basically made of three raw materials, time, matter/energy, and space. All three were created simultaneously by God. God is not subject to time because God created time. If God is not subject to time, concepts like 'beggining' and 'end' do not apply. These concepts apply only in a time/matter/space universe. It follows that a human mind, being subject to time, is unable to adequately comprehend anything that exists outside the time/space universe. All the gods of greece, rome, India etc are personifications of nature, they are spacio-temporal. Only the God of the Bible is fully transcendant.