Discussion in 'Christianity' started by Geo, Aug 9, 2021.
It is the solipsism that allowed a monster like Mao tse Tung to cause the deaths of 70 million people.
I think people who think they know better are the major reason for violence on earth.
But that's not an answer to my question, is it?
IMO It is the original sin of a natural creature having to take life in order to sustain its own. The lion feeds and the zebra dies. With human beings it gets more complicated ... when is killing a sin?
Every day on a several channels there are crime story's going on, over and over.
Repeatedly. Both non fiction, and fiction.
Because, this organic paradigm which the devil instigated is a predator/prey situation, and of course, many feel it is the only reality.
When is killing a sin?
The devil? Who wrote this simulation? Lol
Who is the bug in the programming?
And who is the programmer?
G!d or devil?
Or are they one or none?
Sin will continue but the plan of God delivers us from sin.
As Baha'u'llah also said.
How about asking a vegetarian?
How about considering it in another creation?
Consider it before the Fall, and then after the Flood.
The world, as had been said, was covered by an icy cloud-like "shell", which kept the outer cosmic rays from entering the atmosphere, which also had emitted a type of pink spectrum through it onto the planet.
You can look up and see that the agricultural grow warehouses use the pink light spectrum.
After the flood?
The skies were opened up, the rainbow became evident, and the ultra-violet light reached the earth which played a big role regarding the shortening of lifespans.
So, this natural situation is not what originally existed. I expect those cosmic rays reaching the earth changed our situation, wherein the vegetation was not providing all we needed.
Or, humanity changed.
Even a vegetarian must kill tiny creatures in the water every time he drinks, crush tiny creatures underfoot with every step and tiny creatures in the air with every breath. It's unavoidable. Original sin. Imo
I don't know who "said" it, but it is an interesting idea. Visible light exists between the infra-red and ultra-violet. Cosmic rays are mostly protons moving at an incredible speed that damage organic matter. However they break up by collisions with air and other particles in the atmosphere, and scatter into showers of less dangerous particles. So ... ok yes ... the idea flies, imo
Yes. Then today we are told to use sunscreen.
I recall the old "Coppertone" ads.
Well, you may notice that this discussion includes the Catholic teachings.
Sure, there's plenty enough to criticize things going on in the Catholic church.
However, regarding their teachings, they largely include acknowledgement of the effects of the, "original sin",
and absolution, with respect to honest and truthful confession.
The Catholic Church has preserved the knowledge of Christ down through the centuries, imo.
'Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
For all the failings, God knows the guilt of men and human failing, yet still preserves by means of His church, the life of Christ with all its mysteries, essentially by centuries and millennia unchanged and strong, imo?
Just my own opinion
We're real alright.
It's just this "meat suit" that is evolved dust.
Which theologians say this? And where is this roundly accepted as fact?
Well it's what we read in scripture wil. And, what is speculated by Creationists.
I thought my question was.clear. Can you answer it in regards to the statement you posted?
Yes. Well, in the 21st century wil, I guess you'll have to do some homework and Google it.
"If background radiation has such a powerful ‘aging effect’, then in principle this should easily show up experimentally.
One would expect differences, for example, in populations naturally shielded from or exposed to differing degrees of such radiation, whether among humans or animals. It should be relatively easy to raise mice in a completely radiation-free environment and see a massive increase in lifespans."
Yes. Well. In the 21st century @Geo I guess if someone proposes some sort of way-out theory, it is up to that person to provide references -- not for everyone else to have to go googling around obscure websites. At least that's how we do it here on IO?
No intentional rudeness, just swinging the ball back into your own court ...
Separate names with a comma.