Religions > Atheism > Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
28 May 2006 04:08:15 PM |
| Object: |
Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=RELIGION-FAITH-05-24-06
Sacred sex in the temple
By TERRY MATTINGLY
Scripps Howard News Service
24-MAY-06
In the beginning, Judaism was a faith built on sacred sex.
At least, that's what Dan Brown told 60 million readers in "The Da
Vinci Code," speaking though a fictional Harvard scholar named Robert
Langdon. And while the characters are fictional, the novelist continues
to affirm the statement that opens his book: "All descriptions of
artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this novel are
accurate."
One of those "secret rituals" is an eye-opener.
"Langdon's Jewish students always looked flabbergasted when he told
them that the early Jewish tradition involved ritualistic sex. In the
temple, no less," wrote Brown, in one of many long speeches that
explain his iconoclastic plot. "Early Jews believed that the Holy of
Holies in Solomon's Temple housed not only God but also His powerful
female equal, Shekinah. Men seeking spiritual wholeness came to the
Temple to visit priestesses ... with whom they made love and
experienced the divine through physical union."
For most people, the big news in "The Da Vinci Code" story was its
message that Jesus was a brilliant and charismatic man _ but not the
Son of God _ who was married to St. Mary Magdalene, had a child and
tried to start a church built on secret truths and goddess worship.
But Jesus was killed and, after a few centuries, powerful men crushed
the Gnostic Christians. Meanwhile, the secret bloodline of Jesus, says
the novel, lived on in Europe.
That's the side of the book, and now the movie, that makes headlines.
But there is a message in the novel that is even more controversial
and, for traditional Christians and Jews, more radical, according to
philosopher Vishal Mangalwadi, who was born and educated in the diverse
religious culture of India.
"The Da Vinci Code" is absolutely right when it states that the
Judeo-Christian tradition, through the ages, did everything that it
could to suppress sexual mysticism, fertility rites and goddess
worship. The early church, he stressed, emerged in a world that was
packed with pagan sanctuaries filled with scores of temple prostitutes.
The Judeo-Christian tradition emphasized the holiness of marriage, but
never taught that sexual intercourse was _ in and of itself _ a sacred
rite in which the spirit escapes the body and is able commune with some
all-embracing deity.
"Dan Brown is right about the following: some pagan converts to Christ
did bring sexual mysticism into the early church," said Mangalwadi, in
a speech he delivered this week at Hollywood (Calif.) Presbyterian
Church. In fact, the Book of Revelation condemns two early churches
that tolerated believers who "practiced religious sex. It is possible
that before becoming Christians these women and men had participated in
prostitution in pagan temples ... .
"Given the fact that Christianity was an ascending religious force,
they may have found it to their advantage to attract customers in the
name of Christ. Some may well have re-written the life of Christ in the
light of pagan spirituality to justify their preferred 'religious'
practice."
In "The Da Vinci Code" itself, Brown stresses that the use of sexual
rituals to create union with the gods and goddesses is older than the
Christian faith and could, he claimed, be seen in Judaism. A one point,
a central character witnesses a modern ritual in which a couple has
sexual intercourse while surrounded by a circle of other members of the
secret society that is preserving the true Christianity.
Thus, Brown's alter ego explains: "Historically, intercourse was the
act through which male and female experienced God. The ancients
believed that the male was spiritually incomplete until he had carnal
knowledge of the sacred feminine. Physical union with the female
remained the sole means through which man could become spiritually
complete and ultimately achieve gnosis _ knowledge of the divine. ...
'By communing with woman,' Langdon said, 'man could achieve a climactic
instance when his mind went totally blank and he could see God.' "
The key is that this experience is the "sole means" for transformation.
This theme is explicit in the novel, even though the movie does not
stress it.
"Dan Brown is promoting a mystic experience in which our mind goes
'totally blank' _ beyond words, thoughts, ideals, beliefs and values,"
argued Mangalwadi. "This is a non-rational experience. Mystics promote
it because they consider the intellect to be the source of ignorance,
not a means to gaining knowledge."
(Terry Mattingly (www.tmatt.net) directs the Washington Journalism
Center at the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities.)
.
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
12 Jun 2006 07:34:08 PM |
|
|
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 00:15:11 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 19:45:10 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Still begging the question: how do you separate the 'origin
of species from the origin of life'? Think how you'd
separate the 'trees from the forest... burn the forest and
there are no trees, cut down the trees and there's no forest.
Chemist: "If you mix hydrogen and oxygen, and apply enough heat, they
react and unite with one another to form water. If you do the same
thing with oxygen and carbon, you get carbon dioxide. If you--"
Dummy, can you separate water from its elements and still
have water?
You can study properties of water without even knowing what it's
elements are.
So what?
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Snyder" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
12 Jun 2006 07:48:55 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
12 Jun 2006 09:39:03 PM |
|
|
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Snyder" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
12 Jun 2006 11:04:12 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
13 Jun 2006 02:40:43 AM |
|
|
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
Projection is good.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Snyder" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
13 Jun 2006 08:07:50 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:40:43 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
Projection is good.
Then project yourself. Off a cliff, preferably.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
13 Jun 2006 02:04:52 PM |
|
|
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:40:43 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
Projection is good.
Then project yourself. Off a cliff, preferably.
Hysteria is good.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Snyder" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
13 Jun 2006 05:02:42 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:04:52 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:40:43 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
Projection is good.
Then project yourself. Off a cliff, preferably.
Hysteria is good.
Your assertions are pretty hysterical, come to think of it.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
13 Jun 2006 07:20:18 PM |
|
|
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 12:04:52 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:40:43 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:39:03 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:34:08 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Bill Snyder wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 07:34:49 GMT, David Johnston <rgorman@block.net>
wrote:
So your argument is fallacious.
IMHO you misspelled "fellatious." The troll's argument really sucks.
That's your best, isn't it?
No, but I think it's not bad. And even if I'm wrong, it's better than
lying to beat the band, pretending that you can't talk about how
something behaves without knowing where it came from, slandering
everyone in sight, being too lazy and/or stupid and/or rude to snip,
*and* not being hilariously funny.
That's your best? You should have stuck with the spelling
criticism.
Really gets to you to be the stupidest one in the room, doesn't it?
Projection is good.
Then project yourself. Off a cliff, preferably.
Hysteria is good.
Your assertions are pretty hysterical, come to think of it.
Since when have you decided you can think without a brain?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
05 Jun 2006 12:30:49 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 09:44:18 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
But neither thing requires you to know who first invented the internal
combustion engine.
Its required if you wish to get your degree in 'combustion
engines'.
No. It is not. "Who invented the internal combustion engine" will
not be on the final exam. And knowing that name will not help you
figure out how an IC engine works or build one even a little bit.
When someone asks you what
happens if someone combined hydrogen, oxygen and a spark do you demand
to know where they got the hydrogen from because without that you
can't know the answer?
Nonsense questions are good.
No, they aren't.
Then why do you ask them?
They aren't nonsense at all if you continue to claim that a theory is
no good unless we know the origin of everything or fail to explain why
evolution is any different from other theories in that regard.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
05 Jun 2006 02:24:41 PM |
|
|
David Johnston wrote:
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 09:44:18 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
But neither thing requires you to know who first invented the internal
combustion engine.
Its required if you wish to get your degree in 'combustion
engines'.
No. It is not. "Who invented the internal combustion engine" will
not be on the final exam. And knowing that name will not help you
figure out how an IC engine works or build one even a little bit.
When someone asks you what
happens if someone combined hydrogen, oxygen and a spark do you demand
to know where they got the hydrogen from because without that you
can't know the answer?
Nonsense questions are good.
No, they aren't.
Then why do you ask them?
They aren't nonsense at all if you continue to claim that a theory is
no good unless we know the origin of everything or fail to explain why
evolution is any different from other theories in that regard.
Can you get to point B without beginning at point A?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wayne Throop" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
05 Jun 2006 02:27:50 PM |
|
|
: Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
: Can you get to point B without beginning at point A?
Yes. You start somewhere else. This seems quite obvious.
And even if you disallow anything but your point A as a "beginning",
you still need nothing about point A to know that you are currently
on a road, and that the road leads to point B.
But more interestingly, let's presume we start at the thread-implied
point "A" of God. How does that help you get to any particular point B?
Especially in terms of physics, biology, other sciences, and the attendant
engineering technologies based on them? You needn't answer, I think
everybody knows.
Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
05 Jun 2006 11:53:48 PM |
|
|
Wayne Throop wrote:
: Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
: Can you get to point B without beginning at point A?
Yes. You start somewhere else. This seems quite obvious.
And even if you disallow anything but your point A as a "beginning",
you still need nothing about point A to know that you are currently
on a road, and that the road leads to point B.
'A' is always the starting point whether you realize it or
not. The road is not yours to affix its beginning at your
personal convenience.
But more interestingly, let's presume we start at the thread-implied
point "A" of God. How does that help you get to any particular point B?
Especially in terms of physics, biology, other sciences, and the attendant
engineering technologies based on them? You needn't answer, I think
everybody knows.
Most everbody knows, especially if they've had the usual
secular indoctrination, only what they've been taught.
Evolution doesn't answer the critical question of how we
came by the ability to think consciously. The toys we
invent are mere distractions that convince us falsely that
we know what we're about.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
08 Jun 2006 04:39:34 PM |
|
|
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:stWdnUdYM6jUlxjZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Wayne Throop wrote:
....
Most everbody knows, especially if they've had the usual
secular indoctrination, only what they've been taught.
Evolution doesn't answer the critical question of how we
came by the ability to think consciously. The toys we
invent are mere distractions that convince us falsely that
we know what we're about.
That's because scientific theories don't explain everything. They explain
something. There is at present no single theory of how conscious thought
came about. There is, however, an enormous body of evidence to show that
apes and humans had a common ancestor. Why humans are so different to apes
is a problem that has not yet been solved.
This is how normal people approach normal issues in their lives. The kind of
person who says - "We can't buy groceries today, we haven't decided where we
going on holiday" would be regarded by most people as at the least
eccentric, and possibly insane. It's part of the normal approach to life
that problems are approached one at a time, and addressed piecemeal. That's
how people do it - and that's how science does it, because science is just
common sense applied in a rigourous way.
Pseudo-scientists of all kinds can often be identified by the tendency to
have one big solution for everything, and refusing to accept that the gaps
get filled in a bit at a time.
J/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
08 Jun 2006 10:12:45 PM |
|
|
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:stWdnUdYM6jUlxjZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Wayne Throop wrote:
...
Most everbody knows, especially if they've had the usual
secular indoctrination, only what they've been taught.
Evolution doesn't answer the critical question of how we
came by the ability to think consciously. The toys we
invent are mere distractions that convince us falsely that
we know what we're about.
That's because scientific theories don't explain everything. They explain
something. There is at present no single theory of how conscious thought
came about.
Precisely.
There is, however, an enormous body of evidence to show that
apes and humans had a common ancestor.
Nonsense.
Why humans are so different to apes
is a problem that has not yet been solved.
The differences make all the difference... eh? Can it be
that apes and humans are just different, and without common
ancestry? Or is that too radical a departure from the
"Secular Humanist" agenda even to be considerred?
This is how normal people approach normal issues in their lives. The kind of
person who says - "We can't buy groceries today, we haven't decided where we
going on holiday" would be regarded by most people as at the least
eccentric, and possibly insane. It's part of the normal approach to life
that problems are approached one at a time, and addressed piecemeal. That's
how people do it - and that's how science does it, because science is just
common sense applied in a rigourous way.
Hmm... what happened to your idea that reasoning people can
address multiple proposals at the same time?
Pseudo-scientists of all kinds can often be identified by the tendency to
have one big solution for everything, and refusing to accept that the gaps
get filled in a bit at a time.
So then, evo theory is full of gaps. And you accept it as
true. Now, that's faith based religious fundamentalist
thinking at its worst.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 09:43:15 AM |
|
|
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:64-dnevEqImLehXZnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:stWdnUdYM6jUlxjZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Wayne Throop wrote:
...
Most everbody knows, especially if they've had the usual
secular indoctrination, only what they've been taught.
Evolution doesn't answer the critical question of how we
came by the ability to think consciously. The toys we
invent are mere distractions that convince us falsely that
we know what we're about.
That's because scientific theories don't explain everything. They
explain
something. There is at present no single theory of how conscious thought
came about.
Precisely.
There is, however, an enormous body of evidence to show that
apes and humans had a common ancestor.
Nonsense.
It's disturbing, I know. Bid ideas, big deities. Better stick with the
little God trapped in your book.
Why humans are so different to apes
is a problem that has not yet been solved.
The differences make all the difference... eh? Can it be
that apes and humans are just different, and without common
ancestry?
It could be. But the evidence is strongly against it. And contrary to what
evolutionists think, the fossil evidence is the least significant part.
Science is about predictions. When Darwin derived his theory, which stated,
among other things, that humans and apes had a common ancestor, he predicted
that there would be a mechanism via which variation could be transmitted,
and that this mechanism would be the same for all life. This was many years
before the discovery of DNA. But there it was.
Or is that too radical a departure from the
"Secular Humanist" agenda even to be considerred?
Is it possible that God is smart enough to create human life from a starting
point many millions of years in the past, without intervention? Or is that
God a bit too big for you to handle?
This is how normal people approach normal issues in their lives. The
kind of
person who says - "We can't buy groceries today, we haven't decided
where we
going on holiday" would be regarded by most people as at the least
eccentric, and possibly insane. It's part of the normal approach to life
that problems are approached one at a time, and addressed piecemeal.
That's
how people do it - and that's how science does it, because science is
just
common sense applied in a rigourous way.
Hmm... what happened to your idea that reasoning people can
address multiple proposals at the same time?
There is a difference between addressing multiple things together, and
trying to explain everything in one go.
Pseudo-scientists of all kinds can often be identified by the tendency
to
have one big solution for everything, and refusing to accept that the
gaps
get filled in a bit at a time.
So then, evo theory is full of gaps. And you accept it as
true. Now, that's faith based religious fundamentalist
thinking at its worst.
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
J/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 12:12:46 PM |
|
|
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:64-dnevEqImLehXZnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:stWdnUdYM6jUlxjZnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Wayne Throop wrote:
...
Most everbody knows, especially if they've had the usual
secular indoctrination, only what they've been taught.
Evolution doesn't answer the critical question of how we
came by the ability to think consciously. The toys we
invent are mere distractions that convince us falsely that
we know what we're about.
That's because scientific theories don't explain everything. They
explain
something. There is at present no single theory of how conscious thought
came about.
Precisely.
There is, however, an enormous body of evidence to show that
apes and humans had a common ancestor.
Nonsense.
It's disturbing, I know. Bid ideas, big deities. Better stick with the
little God trapped in your book.
No. I'd rather believe in the mythical common ancestor of
apes and man... haw.
Why humans are so different to apes
is a problem that has not yet been solved.
The differences make all the difference... eh? Can it be
that apes and humans are just different, and without common
ancestry?
It could be. But the evidence is strongly against it.
What evidence?
And contrary to what
evolutionists think, the fossil evidence is the least significant part.
What? Bone peddling has lost its lustre?
Science is about predictions. When Darwin derived his theory, which stated,
among other things, that humans and apes had a common ancestor, he predicted
that there would be a mechanism via which variation could be transmitted,
and that this mechanism would be the same for all life. This was many years
before the discovery of DNA. But there it was.
Same 'mechanism' does not guarantee same 'ancestor'.
There seems to be no end to the spurious logic of evo fundies.
Or is that too radical a departure from the
"Secular Humanist" agenda even to be considerred?
Is it possible that God is smart enough to create human life from a starting
point many millions of years in the past, without intervention? Or is that
God a bit too big for you to handle?
There is nothing 'too big' for God to handle.
This is how normal people approach normal issues in their lives. The
kind of
person who says - "We can't buy groceries today, we haven't decided
where we
going on holiday" would be regarded by most people as at the least
eccentric, and possibly insane. It's part of the normal approach to life
that problems are approached one at a time, and addressed piecemeal.
That's
how people do it - and that's how science does it, because science is
just
common sense applied in a rigourous way.
Hmm... what happened to your idea that reasoning people can
address multiple proposals at the same time?
There is a difference between addressing multiple things together, and
trying to explain everything in one go.
Pseudo-scientists of all kinds can often be identified by the tendency
to
have one big solution for everything, and refusing to accept that the
gaps
get filled in a bit at a time.
So then, evo theory is full of gaps. And you accept it as
true. Now, that's faith based religious fundamentalist
thinking at its worst.
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
You know how people deal with knowledge in real life?
Perhaps you have a definition of 'real life'?... I believe
Chomsky and Pinker among others would appreciate it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 03:02:39 PM |
|
|
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
....
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
You know how people deal with knowledge in real life?
Perhaps you have a definition of 'real life'?... I believe
Chomsky and Pinker among others would appreciate it.
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
J/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 04:10:10 PM |
|
|
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
...
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
You know how people deal with knowledge in real life?
Perhaps you have a definition of 'real life'?... I believe
Chomsky and Pinker among others would appreciate it.
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
Is usenet not real?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 11:41:08 AM |
|
|
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QYudnYQ-lskHfhTZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
....
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you
comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
And He's taught you everything He knows? What a tiny, tiny God you believe
in.
J/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 11:57:26 PM |
|
|
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QYudnYQ-lskHfhTZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
...
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you
comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
And He's taught you everything He knows?
Impossible.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (29-28) The secret things belong
unto the LORD our God; but the things that are
revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever,
that we may do all the words of this law.
What a tiny, tiny God you believe
in.
So you pray.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
11 Jun 2006 01:08:00 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:57:26 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QYudnYQ-lskHfhTZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
...
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you
comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
And He's taught you everything He knows?
Impossible.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (29-28) The secret things belong
unto the LORD our God;
So you were lying when you said you comprehended the universe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
11 Jun 2006 09:18:18 AM |
|
|
David Johnston wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:57:26 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:QYudnYQ-lskHfhTZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
...
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you
comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
And He's taught you everything He knows?
Impossible.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (29-28) The secret things belong
unto the LORD our God;
So you were lying when you said you comprehended the universe.
Read Deuteronomy 29:29 again, see if you can understand it
this time.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 07:07:29 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:10:10 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
...
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
Then obviously you can explain precisely how ball lightning forms.
Go ahead. Pass on your infinite knowledge. I've always wanted to
know the answer to that question.
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
Is usenet not real?
Not really.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
09 Jun 2006 11:40:56 PM |
|
|
David Johnston wrote:
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:10:10 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
...
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
Then obviously you can explain precisely how ball lightning forms.
Go ahead. Pass on your infinite knowledge. I've always wanted to
know the answer to that question.
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
Is usenet not real?
Not really.
Interesting... care to explain?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 01:03:12 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 21:40:56 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
David Johnston wrote:
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:10:10 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
...
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
Then obviously you can explain precisely how ball lightning forms.
Go ahead. Pass on your infinite knowledge. I've always wanted to
know the answer to that question.
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
And since you comprehend the universe, you can tell us which opposing
forces cause that one, right?
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
Is usenet not real?
Not really.
Interesting... care to explain?
Nothing that matters happens on Usenet. It's just idle chatter.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 02:35:21 AM |
|
|
David Johnston wrote:
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 21:40:56 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
David Johnston wrote:
On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:10:10 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
Westprog wrote:
"Roy Jose Lorr" <Kenthz@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:xYKdnQ3bstprNhTZnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@comcast.com...
...
All theories are full of gaps. The idea that a scientific theory could
explain all of creation is mystical nonsense. It's also irreligious. And
it
is not how people actually deal with knowlege in real life.
The point is that you accept as true that which is
incomplete. That is an act of religious faith.
Everything understood as true is incomplete. Do you believe you comprehend
the universe?
Certainly. I have the absolute best teacher.
Then obviously you can explain precisely how ball lightning forms.
Go ahead. Pass on your infinite knowledge. I've always wanted to
know the answer to that question.
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
And since you comprehend the universe, you can tell us which opposing
forces cause that one, right?
Wrong.
Real life is what we do when we aren't debating on Usenet.
Is usenet not real?
Not really.
Interesting... care to explain?
Nothing that matters happens on Usenet. It's just idle chatter.
Tell that to the terrorists who use it to communicate what
matters to them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 02:47:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:35:21 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
And since you comprehend the universe, you can tell us which opposing
forces cause that one, right?
Wrong.
Then you don't actually comprehend the universe. Nobody does of
course so that isn't to your discredit. But the nice thing about
scientists is that they actually work to come up with real answers to
questions like that. They'll never comprehend the whole universe of
course, but they can get closer and that's a valuable pursuit.
Nothing that matters happens on Usenet. It's just idle chatter.
Tell that to the terrorists who use it to communicate what
matters to them.
No they don't. That sort of thing happens in websites, not Usenet.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
10 Jun 2006 11:54:46 PM |
|
|
David Johnston wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:35:21 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
And since you comprehend the universe, you can tell us which opposing
forces cause that one, right?
Wrong.
Then you don't actually comprehend the universe. Nobody does of
course so that isn't to your discredit. But the nice thing about
scientists is that they actually work to come up with real answers to
questions like that. They'll never comprehend the whole universe of
course, but they can get closer and that's a valuable pursuit.
Vanity is good.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (29-28) The secret things belong
unto the LORD our God; but the things that are
revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever,
that we may do all the words of this law.
Nothing that matters happens on Usenet. It's just idle chatter.
Tell that to the terrorists who use it to communicate what
matters to them.
No they don't. That sort of thing happens in websites, not Usenet.
Ignorance is good.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Johnston" |
|
| Title: Re: Sacred Sex Was Practiced In Jewish Temple, Says Da Vinci Code |
11 Jun 2006 01:07:30 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:54:46 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
David Johnston wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:35:21 -0700, Roy Jose Lorr <Kenthz@comcast.net>
wrote:
All natural phenomena are caused by the interaction of
opposing forces.
And since you comprehend the universe, you can tell us which opposing
forces cause that one, right?
Wrong.
Then you don't actually comprehend the universe. Nobody does of
course so that isn't to your discredit. But the nice thing about
scientists is that they actually work to come up with real answers to
questions like that. They'll never comprehend the whole universe of
course, but they can get closer and that's a valuable pursuit.
Vanity is good.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (29-28) The secret things belong
unto the LORD our God;
I suppose it should come as no surprise that you are in favour of
ignorance and opposed to learning.
No they don't. That sort of thing happens in websites, not Usenet.
Ignorance is good.
You have made it excrutiatingly obvious that you genuinely hold that
point of view.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
