Christrianity in connection with String Theory

1. 60

   Danny R Handposted 14 years ago

   Does any body besides me see the connection to physical laws and God.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, I see that connection, like black is to white.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      So, where is the connection to physical laws and God?
      
      The string theory ?
      
      Where God comes into the equation ?
      
      The only related word between the String Theory and God is Theory.
      Both are theories !
      
      

      replyreport
   3. 61

      qwarkposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Danny
      I'd like to seriously consider your question but
      I can't until you can define this "god" thing, you mention, in other than opinion and conjecture.
      Can ya do that for me?
      TY....:-)

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         That is a Good Question, and I will do my best. First I AM a Christian. But when I first started researching these matters, I looked in alot of different venues for information. I researched Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, and I looked for things I would call truths. Also books like The Seth Material, The Power of Positive Thinking, as well as any information that dealt with science. Let me give you an outline of the beliefs I came to.
         There is a God. He is a spirit, and my definition of a spirit is concious energy. I believe God IS the Alpha, and He made two sets of laws. Spiritual and physical. These laws are set! However, I believe spiritual laws are dominant to physical laws. Einstein spoke of God being nature itself. To an extent, I agree. I believe God IS a part of everything He creates. It comes down to energy, EVERYTHING at it's core is energy. And with God BEING concious energy, He dwells in the energy of what He created.
         Now, books like The Seth Material, The Power of Positive Thinking, and the Bible, all speak of creating physical reality with thought. The Seth Material states, 'Thoughts are electrical impulses carried across the surface of the brain with chemicals. If a sufficent enough amount of energy is created with thoughts, that energy will create a physical reality. The Bible speaks of moving mountains into the sea if only we believe.
         String theory, and the laws of physics and quantum physics, actually back this theory up. AND the first thing the Bible tells us about God is that He created. So He is a creator. If man is made in Gods image, then we are creators. We create our physical reality with our thoughts.
         The Bible gives man two very important aspects. One: A direct connection with God. This is important because there are positive and negative energies. It is best for man to be in contact with a positve energy. Two: The TRUTH that WE create our own reality. We have a responsiblity to create without harm. When this theory is applied, we fall way short

         replyreport
         1. 61

            qwarkposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Danny:
            I appreciate the "try."
            I asked you to ".. define this "god" thing, you mention, in other than opinion and conjecture."
            You just offered me 100% opinion and conjecture. Why?
            A definition of "man:" a mammal, bipedal, warm blooded, 4 chambered heart, suckles its young, warm blooded, has hair on it's body..etc., etc....empirically "it" exists.
            If you can't provide a definition that compares to the above, and all you can offer is what you provided, then I cannot consider you to be serious or credible in respect to your forum question.
            The "string theory" has  been proved mathematically but not objectively.
            My question would be to you, why do you ask your forum question when neither of the "subjects" stands the test of reality?
            You could get nothing more than "guesses" as responses.
            What would you hope to accomplish?....:-)

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Qwark.
               Sorry to waste your time. If you feel you cannot take me serious, or believe me not to be credible, then I would suggest you just ignore my comments. I'm OK with that.

               replyreport
            2. 60

               Ashmiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               To define God is to deny Him......definitions limit His being.  He can no longer be omnipresent or omnipotent. A god as separate from creation is also a nonsense.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  qwarkposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Ashmi:
                  I get no "logical" responses from believers...never have.
                  Now I ask you, this question: Other than "it" being "imagined," what is this god thing? I'd like to have it defined in other than opinion and conjecture.
                  There is no definition, that factually defines this "god" thing, in any monotheistic scripture.
                  I must ignore Danny's remarks because his response is the trite response of every other believer I've ever spoken to.

                  replyreport
   4. 0

      Twenty One Daysposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Randy! (btw, love that avatar) there is no such thing as 'physical' in all truth. Everything is relevant, tangible -by the senses or logic or application of either. All things -including darkness- stem from light.
      Light is energy and therefore the MOST infinite unit of anything, including electro relations of the brain, which humans indulge as thinking, logic, numbers, symbols, glyphs, expressions, desires, wants, needs and all such assumed opposites.
      
      Despite what the 'rationalist' or 'theologians' claim, neither one is correct completely in their presentation of all things of light.
      Now, the epistemological approach considers that ALL logic, sensation and its expressions are indeed identical in elemental property, but carry seemingly infinite expressions.
      
      In short, while BOTH sides of the house of Duality (logic v sensation) battle it out, both are subject to each other and the core Purity, light.
      
      
      Thus why the likes of Quark, Knowles, et al, grunge daily in the 'search' for the evident. Everything is relevent AND tangible.
      The negation stems from lack of total appreciation/understanding of those primary elements of light and its operations.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         AGREED

         replyreport
      2. 56

         Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Quite the opposite actually. Some of us do not feel the need for the perceived self importance that comes with obfuscation and needless esoteric complexity.
         
         Sometimes a simple strawberry is best left alone to be fully enjoyed.
         
         Although - it is rather entertaining sometimes watching our more ....... grammatically challenged? .... cousins agree with you.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Let me tell you a story, You can blame it on psychocis, or a number of other things. But I, experianced it.
            In 1996 I was in prison. They, the gaurds, came to my cell and put me in the hole for six months under investigation for escape. For the record this was a false charge. Now during that time I had one thing to read. The Bible. Now, you have everyright to your beliefs, but I met Him during that 6 months in the hole. You can say whatever you want. It will not change the experiance I had that altered and changed my life. My main reason for believeing in the Lord, I met him. Now you can ridicule me, degrade me, or whatever it takes to make you feel good. But, it will not erase the fact that I know the Lord. So, I hope you can reason on this, but if not, my prayers are with you.

            replyreport
            1. 56

               Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I don't care what you believe.
               
               Why do you even tell me this if you think I will ridicule you to "make myself feel good" ?
               
               Which - if you think about it - is an underhanded attack on me. This passive aggressive attack style is typical of your cult and - I find it offensive - because it is so dishonest.
               
               It is - on the other hand - one of the many reasons I discard your belief system as garbage.
               
               If you genuinely believed what you claim - you would not feel the need to underhandedly attack me - nor would you need to lie to defend those beliefs. Call it semantics if you will - but - scroll up.
               
               All of which goes to convince me that there is no god.
               
               Thank you.
               
               Still waiting to hear about how the becoming your own son to save mankind from the sin you inflicted on them and murdering yourself horrible so you can come back to life has anything whatsoever to do with string theory other than "you can't see it - therefore it is the same and I really want to believe and will take anything I can get as proof." LOL

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I RESPECTFULLY decline. I'm thinking that we are not going to come to any understanding. Also I have no intent of deceiving, or having comments misintepreted. I place no blame, we see things differently. I wish you well, and maybe we could see more eye to eye in another venue, such as politics. No, I'm neither repulican or democrate. Anyway I wish you best and hope we can speak again in a different venue.

                  replyreport
            2. 59

               Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               My atheism, and the atheism shared by many others I know have never landed any of us in prison. Just a thought. 

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Twenty One Daysposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  it killed millions of theists, rationalists, philosophers, even scientists and put even more under slave control.
                  want to guess who those folks were?
                  perhaps we should lump all the atheists into their same ideology as atheist do others. Seems only fair.
                  
                  but again, an atheist is nothing without a theist.
                  why you all think you're so different is logically staggering and humorous. Indeed, the answer in my own question, hey believe they are thinking. Reminds me of people with one hand trying to clap without the other, just swatting at the air and smiling from ear to ear. Procaine Hydrochloride Syndrome, I was told was the term.
                  
                  

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Something you'll dream up that has no relevance whatsoever?
                     
                     
                     
                     Atheism is a lack of an ideology.
                     
                     
                     
                     I think a well placed "Duh" is needed.
                     
                     
                     
                     Yes, it is.

                     replyreport
2. 84

   rebekahELLEposted 14 years ago

   everything is connected...

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I dig that! Please explain?

      replyreport
      1. 84

         rebekahELLEposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I don't think I can explain it, but I believe that every single thing in the universe is connected.  {sorry, I'm suffering with an allergy flare up. or I would detail more of my thoughts...}

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Ashmiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            When one thing changes everything changes.
            
            Every event has innumerable causes that produces numberless effects.
            
            This means that causation is an illusion as you cannot trace the cause of anything.

            replyreport
3. 67

   goldenpathposted 14 years ago

   Yes.  Physical laws are continually being reworked according to new data and discoveries.  More refined matter than what can be seen is fast becoming the norm in science.  I've always taught that all spirit is matter, yet just more refined and pure. 
   
   There are huge connections in relation to the Fall.  The physical laws of blood ocurred through the Fall as did sickness and disease.  It's the blood that aided in the perpetuation of the species.  This blood they did not have prior to the Fall and in their perfect state. 
   
   Physical laws are discovering and learning of new dimensions.  I've always taught that the realm of spirits is here on Earth, both for the wicked and the righteous.  They can and do occupy the same space and time.
   
   Physical laws are learning that it is the genetic "switches" that help cause the limited life span through sickness and other means.  Without these "switches" being activated through, as I see it, intelligent design the human species would remain alive indefinitely.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Physical laws are unknown to many, especially believers, however they believe these laws were meant to be interpreted, broken or changed as they see fit (like the laws of their god). Of course, because believers take advantage of all that science has brought them, they are constantly trying to reconcile their beliefs with reality and are forced to form fit (square peg, round hole) what they imagine they know about the world around them with magic.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         SirDentposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         It is not so much that they are unknown. God transcends physical laws.
         
         Let's try and keep the stories straight.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            That would then allow believers to say and believe anything they want that defies all logic and reason without a shred of proof...
            
            Wait just a cotton pickin' minute... THEY ALREADY DO!!! 

            replyreport
   2. 77

      Mikel G Robertsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I disagree, we may not die of old age, but eventually we would still die of something...a car wreck, volcano, religious terrorists...
      
      I really think the human body is by design meant to expire. The soul is what we really are. 

      replyreport
      1. 62

         TLMinutposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I don't know Mikel, do we really have to die?
         http://www.ted.com/talks/aubrey_de_grey … aging.html

         replyreport
         1. 77

            Mikel G Robertsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            eventually, I think so... we may come up with ways to stay alive for hundreds of thousands of years, but sooner or later I think we will still die.
            
            But I do agree, we don't have to die because of aging...I hope we can and do 'cure' the disease of aging, but I also believe that even if we do cure it, we will still die of something, sooner or later.

            replyreport
4. 62

   TLMinutposted 14 years ago

   I just watched Brian Greene on Ted Talks today - he simplified String Theory to total understandability (I believe his talk was from 2005 though.) I don't know why we're all convinced that there are immutable, unchanging laws of everything to be found honestly.
   
   Everything is connected, yes, but I'm not sure that it's because all is composed of the same thing. Not that it isn't, but so far string theory doesn't hold up mathematically and the theories of those who disagree with it are ever more bizarre. It may be that everything is connected because it's all pervaded by the same substance/spirit that is life. No not life. BEING. That's it - BEING/EXISTENCE. Existence seems to be something of its own.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      cheaptrickposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes,existence occurs through the action of being.
      The main focus of the new Hadron Collider is to hopefully empirically prove the existence of the"strangling",also known as the God particle.Curiously enough the strangling is the pervasive particle that answers the question of all things being made of the same essence.The postulation of this particle leads to a disturbing necessity,That matter is congealed through qualities such as physics descriptive terms like Brilliance,verve,weirdness etc.
      Question! If non physical qualities congeal into physical particles dose the act of thinking generate matter,IE:do we create through thought alone as the Bible says God does?
      So,what is the meaning of this quote in that context"Have I not told ye that ye are all Gods"

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The Power of Positive Thinking
         The Seth Material
         The Secret, and
         The Holy Bible, are all books which advocate thought creating physical reality.

         replyreport
5. 65

   Ben Evansposted 14 years ago

   String theory is a way of describing GUFT (Grand Unified Field Theory).  Right now string theory is just a theory or a belief and you know what?........ "That is the same with christianity or any other religion."  Trying to tie them together should not be our point.  Because one exists, does not mean the other doesn't.
   
   
   
   When considering GUFT, there are many things that appear perplexing to our current understanding of molecules.  While I am not an expert on quantum mechanics, electromagnetics or nuclear physics, I do have a base understanding of both partial differential equations and some implications of GUFT.  GUFT describes how gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong nuclear forces can coexist peacfully together.  One simple example is:   "Why do opposite charges attract and at the same time opposite charges exist in an atom.  In this atom, the electron stays in orbit and does not spin into the nucleus that contains protons (it also contains nuetrons).
   
   How can this be? 
   
   There will always be information that is not known both in the physical as well as spiritual world.  Trying to explain our beliefs or trying to refute another persons beliefs based on science is a mistake.  Some things will remain unanswered.  GUFT may or may not be proven in the near future.  How ever it will stand alone from our beliefs as it cannot describe or refute or spirituality.....Our beliefs are what is real in our universe which is inside ourselves. 
   
   Our beliefs are not proven they are felt by our spirit's desire and this is what is called faith.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Not mentioning the fact that the number of electrons and protons in an atom are always equal (unless a charge is added) the model of the atom in which electrons were thought to "orbit" the nucleus is not really a good or valid representation.
      
      What's interesting is that the QF models for all the forces are quite accurate and consistently agree with experiments. All except gravity. But, gravity isn't really considered a force in the same regards as electromagnetism, weak and the strong nuclear forces, which might explain why it doesn't fit with a GUFT.
      
      Maybe it can't and never will as loop quantum theory suggests. I tend to go along with that, perhaps gravity can't be force fitted into a GUFT. Just look at what gravity can do to the other forces when huge amounts of mass congeal in one space, it literally squishes them out of existence. 

      replyreport
   2. 63

      Daniel Carterposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent post. Nice clarification.
      
      Moreover, I would say that our spiritual beliefs are usually *experienced*, at a core level therefore, resulting in a belief. However, the caveat is that it usually becomes an overgrown tree needing massive pruning as a result of added appendages to explain those experiences such as doctrine, policy and dogma. Trim all that away and you have the original experience, which is often unexplainable. That makes the experience more similar in nature and analysis to other unknowns in the universe.

      replyreport
6. 0

   Will Bensonposted 14 years ago

   Good post Ben.

   replyreport
7. 0

   Deborah Sextonposted 14 years ago

   The string theory is used to try to explain some unexplainable phenomenon.
   It's a hypothetical threadlike concentration of energy within the structure of space-time.(dimensions)

   replyreport
8. 60

   Danny R Handposted 14 years ago

   As to string theory not holding up mathematically, this is the ONLY theory that ties gravity to the other three natural forces mathematically. The theory holds up better mathematically than anything else put forth. Thats why it has gained so much attention. Ben Evans, your correct that it is only a theory, but that is because we don't have the technology to observe the behavoir of these 'strings', due to the size. We know that everything at it's base level is energy. String theory is an attempt to exlpain the workings of that energy on a miniscule level.Beelzedad, I regret that you generalize all believers into a neat little package that fits into YOUR idea of things. Einstein stated that the universe had so much order that God had to exist. I suppose he fits in your little box about believers too?

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      True, but there probably isn't a single person here who actually understands the first thing about string theory as a result of those mathematics, so it wouldn't make sense for us to comment intelligently about the topic.
      
      
      
      Ha! And, you don't generalize all non-believers into a neat little package that fits into YOUR beliefs? Then, perhaps you can explain if the neat little package you refer has something to do with believing in a god, but can't provide a shred of evidence for those beliefs?
      
      
      
      Why are you lying about that?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The box I am reffering to is is that you are generalizing all believers with statements like "Physical laws are unknown to many, especially believers" The practice of generalizing actually restricts a person from indentifying ALL of the facts. When a person makes an assumption without all of the facts, the end product is faulty. As to wheather or not I think people should believe as I do, no I do not. I have (believe it or not) used my reason and my logic to seek as much information as possible and have used that information to make what I believe is the best rational decision. There is a God. What you believe has no bearing on me unless it affects me or my family. Thats between you and God.
         As to Einsteins quote, I don't have that direct quote to give you, although I do recall reading it. But I will give you another.     
         "In the veiw of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support for such veiws." ( The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeston University Press pg. 214
         Also:"When the answer is simple, God is speaking"
         I have no need to lie.

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.
            Albert Einstein, in a letter responding to philosopher Eric Gutkind, who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt; quoted from James Randerson, "Childish Superstition: Einstein's Letter Makes View of Religion Relatively Clear: Scientist's Reply to Sell for up to £8,000, and Stoke Debate over His Beliefs" The Guardian, (13 May 2008)
            
            Is selectively quoting people lying?
            
            Yeah - I think so. You are a believer for sure.
            
            When the answer is unknown - god is the easy peasy answer for scared people who have to have an answer or their lives are meaningless.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               "Then there are the fanatical atheist whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source... They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres."
               I never said Einstein was a Christian, or even suggested he belonged to any specific belief. He did however believe in intelligent design. Intelligent design suggests an intelligence behind that design, therefore a God, Supreme Being ect...
               Although there are ALOT of Religous people, christian too, that attack others for thier belief or lack thereof, I am not one of them. Why do some feel it nessasary to attack someone putting forth thier point of view? I believe you might be guilty of exactly what you accuse believers of. I'M JUST SAYIN!

               replyreport
               1. 56

                  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  He was pretty clear about god though. So - you were basically lying. I'M JUST SAYIN!
                  
                  "The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke
                  
                  Still - I get the impression that you religionists would like it if us atheists disappeared in a puff of smoke.
                  
                  Oh - wait.
                  
                  So - whose sock puppet are you?

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Of course I don't want you to disappear anywhere. You have as much right to be here, and speak, as I do. Maybe I should pay more attention to my delivery of certain statements. And I will. Just for the record, I do believe in God, I am a Christian, and I believe I have NO right to tell you or anyone else what to believe. My responsibility, according to my beliefs, are to try and be an example of kindness, and compassion. I fall short, but I still keep trying.
                     That is my puppet master.

                     replyreport
                     1. 56

                        Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Well - I consider mis- or selectively- quoting Einstein to be underhanded and misleading.
                        
                        But - let's be honest here - a lot of believers feel the need to do that. This entire thread is an attempt to convince people to believe in a god.
                        
                        it is this type of behavior that reinforces my belief that your christian religion is a crock.
                        
                        I genuine;ly do not care one whit what anyone else believes. But - I do care when they use politics and lies to attempt to influence others. This is the real evil in religion and a belief in god. The constant warring. Even between religionists. Just look through a few of the other threads - there are plenty of fights amongst believers over interpretation of who said what or who knows god or who is really a god's child. Look at how many threads are started to push one idea of god over another idea of god.
                        
                        What a joke. A blight on humanity. I think it is evil and is holding us back as a species.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree with you! I feel strongly that I was blessed in the sense that I read the Bible and made my decision to become a christian from that. I was not guided, or indoctrined. Everything I read told ME not to judge, and to love my brother. I have to say, sometimes I don't sit real well in a church because, as nice as I can, I will call someone out who is teaching ANYTHING different than what I've read. And what really gases me, is that they put thier own self-rightousness above the message of love and tolerance. And that just pushes people away. I really don't get it. To me it's illogical.

                           replyreport
                           1. 56

                              Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              Well - good for you.
                              
                              So - why the need to lie about Einstein, who was vehement that he absolutely did not believe in a personal god - and when pushed would admit only that he could see how some people would call the orderliness to the universe a god but he could not accept any personal intervention from this so-called god and that the Christian religion is childish and foolish?

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 I was responding to a comment that was made, that gave the impression that all believers knew nothing of science. I did not lie, nor intentionally mislead. Einstein did make a reference to there being to much order not to have intelligent design. As I said before, I will be more careful about how I state things. Considering Einstein is at the top of the scientfic ladder, I was trying to make a point. I NEVER said Einstein believed in a personal God, or was inclined towards any specific religous belief. I just said God. I did not lie.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 56

                                    Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                    Semantics. Same as lies.
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    Which is not what he said at all. So - let me rephrase my question.
                                    
                                    If you believe in the way you do and say that you do not feel the need to convince anyone of anything - why the need to "accidentally mis-quote" Einstein, because - let's face it - being backed into a corner in public and saying, "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings," is not stating "that the universe had so much order that God had to exist."
                                    
                                    LOL I am an atheist and if backed into corner am happy to say the same. "Sure - an invisible god that has absolutely no interaction with the Universe and makes no difference if it exists or not?" Why not? Yeah - I can believe in that god. Oh - you have some rules that this god gave you? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
                                    
                                    So - once again - we are back to believers who feel the need use semantics to support their ridiculous beliefs and it would appear that you are attempting to justify and convince.
                                    
                                    You never said "an invisible god that has absolutely no interaction with the Universe and makes no difference if it exists or not" you said "God," and you are a self-proclaimed Christian attempting to show a connection between Christianity and String Theory.
                                    
                                    Still - where is this business of becoming your own son and murdering yourself to save humanity from the sins you inflicted on them tying into string theory?
                                    
                                    Or is that the invisible non-interactive God you are talking about?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                       Definatly want to continue this. Wife is at hopital and I need to go pick her up. Hopefully we can catch each other later.

                                       report
                                       1. 56

                                          Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                          Wife at hospital definitely outweigh semantic discussions about invisible super beings.
                                          
                                          Catch you later.

                                          report
         2. 59

            Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            From what I have read of believers, they don't know anything about the physical laws of the universe other then that they are irrelevant to them.
            
            
            
            I would have to conclude you have missed out on a tremendous amount of information on which you based your decisions.
            
            
            
            There is absolutely no logic, reason or rationale in that claim, whatsoever. Sorry, but that's the bottom line.
            
            
            
            No it isn't. What I believe or don't believe has nothing to do with reality, and that applies to you too, whether you like or not. Your beliefs in a god are irrelevant to reality.
            
            Again, that is the bottom line.
            
            
            
            But you did lie. Einstein never believed in a god. 

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Albert Einstein responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein
               "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals HIMSELF in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." (emphesis added)
               Albert Einstein, The Human Side, Princeston University Press
               "I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgement on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinetly superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance, but for us, not for God."
               
               AGAIN! I never said Einstein believed in a personal God. I said he believed in 'God'. These QUOTES By Albert Eistein leave NO doubt that although he did not believe in a personal God, he DID believe in God! I have no need to lie. Why do you?

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  No, that says no such thing. Einstein has written that he does not believe in a god. Sorry to burst your bubble. Einstein is calling you the liar.
                  
                  "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

                  replyreport
                  1. 62

                     TLMinutposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     It says exactly what Danny just said it does, pretending otherwise is ridiculous. If you're arguing that Einstein didn't make that quote, that's an entirely different matter. Who's to say Einstein wasn't feeling like that one day, awed by everything, figured there's some sort of a God and then went back to normal? It happens. Blaming Danny for knowing something that was clearly stated doesn't make him a liar.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Thank you!

                        replyreport
                     2. 59

                        Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        That fact that Danny misrepresented that quote is exactly what Einstein was explaining in the quote I provided. I understand that believers really, really want to believe Einstein and every other scientist on the planet were Christians, but that's just another delusion on their part. Einstein knew that, too.   

                        replyreport
                  2. 60

                     Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     I do not believe in a PERSONAL God
                     
                     You just leave that word out and make it your own! Whatever!

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Nice misrepresentation, Danny.
                        
                        "I do not believe in an invisible PURPLE dragon."
                        
                        You just leave that word out and make it your own! 

                        replyreport
9. 60

   Obscure Divineposted 14 years ago

   I thought Christianity tries to steal, oops, I meant connect with any current plausible theory out there...ya know, to keep the faith.  If they can steal the pagan holidays, ancient rituals, and even try to tie the so-called Mayan Prophecy of Doom into their claims of Armageddon bliss, then why not go ahead and add the "String Theories" into the mix?
   Simply pathetic, if you ask me...

   replyreport
10. 58

    Jeramiposted 14 years ago

    I am wondering about the Srth material
       I may know what this refers to and I may not?

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       A woman by the name of Jane Roberts was going to write a book dealing with metaphysics. During her research she presumably came into contact with a spiritual entity which refered to itself as Seth. Apparently, this entity dictated over 5000 pages giving information on life, the hereafter, reincarnation, and many other aspects of humanity.

       replyreport
       1. 58

          Jeramiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Sorry for not replying sooner,
          I thought that you might have been reffering to her.
          I read every one of her books that I could find. That was about 25 years ago.  Very intresting.
             Some of my friends thought that her books were evil.
             I understood them in such a way as to not be contradicting scripture if you can keep an open mind while reading scripture and realizing that most peoples understaning was based upon their own interpretation "ONLY"
              Her books actually marked a turning point in my belief system.  Everything started crawling out of the box that religiousity had been keeping them.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Danny R Handposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I can relate to that very much. Suggested reading, if you have'nt yet.
             The Philistine Prophecy

             replyreport
11. 58

    Jeramiposted 14 years ago

    If I remember correctly Seth was said to be a very ancient spirit guide.

    replyreport
12. 68

    Rod Marsdenposted 14 years ago

    I can't see string theory really proving the existence of God except if you want to pull out the old chestnut that if there is reason and order there must be God.
    
    Personally I believe that string theory neither proves nor disproves the existence of an almighty.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Jeramiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I would think that somebody in this world has a definition of what God is that you might agree with ???

       replyreport
       1. 68

          Rod Marsdenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Sure maybe somebody has a definition of what God is we can all agree with. It is possible. Science and in particular the string theory are not about proving or disproving the existence of the Almighty. Science is primarily about forwarding ideas on how things either came about or work and seeing through experimentation what those ideas are worth.

          replyreport
       2. 59

          Beelzedadposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          There hasn't been a definition of god that even believers can agree with.

          replyreport
          1. 68

             Rod Marsdenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I said possible Beelzedad not probable.
             
             Constantine held a council in which the bishops present agreed on the definition of God...Well most of them did. The ones that didn't were banished to the remotest regions of the empire and one who kept on disagreeing got stoned to death....I supposed agreement where force is applied really isn't agreement is it?
             
             Science can't deal with anything that can't be in some way analyzed. If we cannot define what God is then how can a scientist come along and say hey I have proof positive of God's existence. Even when it comes to string theory you have got to give a scientist a break.

             replyreport
13. 62

    TLMinutposted 14 years ago

    OPer, what do you see as a connection between physical laws and God? You're a believer so you believe God set them in place but you must mean more than that. The orderliness? The immensity? The complexity? I'm just wondering what you see and how it relates to God - do you mean a creator? Or just what?

    replyreport
    1. 56

       Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Semantics.
       
       "Christianity in connection with String Theory"

       replyreport
    2. 60

       Obscure Divineposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I've seen too many people, thus far, just post "stuff" without giving it much thought.  I guess it's their version of throwing a kite in the air, hoping the wind will blow in their favor.  It is rather lame, if ya ask me... 

       replyreport