Who's ID is this anyway ?
Posted by toxilogic at 00:29, 25 Aug 2005Hi,
Unfortunately as these things seem to go, specially in the states, there's no middle ground in sight in the battle between the two IDeologies, too much bigotry on both sides. Science i must say lets itself down (once again) by maintaining an impossible position and throwing themselves- or their standards- in, very very foolish and dare i say without method.
There are three issues, the creation of the universe -or what we think it is anyway, the evolutionairy path earths nature has taken since say half a billion years ago, and most contested the 'arrival' of man.
On the latter the scientists are caught between a rock and a hard place. Observing nature and its intracate balances and adaptations it is o so obvious man is out of place here, man has no real roots. It shouldn't have come as a surprise when the geneticists found our genetic make up lacking, that and a large (4000) amount of genetic faults , something unheard of in earth nature- certainly in our closest 'cousins' bonobo's/chimps. Aren't there any other genetic oddities ? Certainly, mais, wheat, rice, dogs even. Wait a minute, these seem to be rather closely related to human needs? .. Indeed.
Now i'm not making this stuff up, these are scientific facts, but scientists dare not to extrapolate or even speculate.
My turn then... as i said a rock and a hard place, it surely wasn't god that created us. Humans are too faulty, a genetic mess, hardly the result of a divine effort, compared to the beauty all around us on this planet, not that we haven't been trying to bring it down to our level, fortunately there's still plenty of spheres with limited human impact.
Even disregarding the cuneiform stories of Sitchen, it ain't no leap of faith to recognise external interference, going on for 200,000 years at least, off our tiny human timescale, but we should be able to understand that goals and priorities evolved aswell during that time, not to mention earths climate.
So where does all this leave those scientists.. indeed tell it like it is and get hammered for claiming the human race is a created hybrid, - Why ? By whom ? Whats our 'current'status ? ... etc. Questions all would rather evade.
Those that talk god every other minute are not better off, they'll have to come to terms with the fact that our imperfection and the continual effort to adapt (upgrade ?) humanoids can not be the work of the allmighty, no sir. A small comfort, at least the rest of us can finally get an unhindered perspective on the religious writings that have been molded.
It's save to say that 'officially' recognising humans for what they are would create an enormous vacuum, more than room enough for the pseudo gods- and certainly for those that claim to represent them- to take control. It is in this light that the current 'battle' should be seen.
" do unto others as you would have them do unto you "
Bookmark/Search this post with
- toxilogic's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
24 June 2004
6 years 1 week
I don't know if this is pertinent to your blog Tox, but I have been interested in the actual concept of God.I write capitals for God because he seems to have become less of a concept and more of an actuality.
In the Old Testament the god was a terrible fearsome and revengeful God, who was happy to take Abraham's son of his old age just to see if Abraham was obedient to him.
This god, from what is written in the Nag Hammadi Gospels was hateful and jealous, and didn't get any better as the ages progressed.
In fact in the Middle Ages the Jews said to God through the Rabbi of Kotzk......
"Master of the Universe, send us our Messiah, for we have no more strength to suffer.Show me a sign O God, otherwise.....otherwise.....I rebel against Thee.
If Thou dost not keep Thy Covenant, then neither will I keep my Promise,and it is all over, we are through being Thy Chosen People,Thy Peculiar Treasure".
This is an amazing statement and seems to mean that they felt they had a choice.
I find it incredible, being raised with the Christian God to find people thinking that way.
To the Christians, God is supposed to be about love.Although Constantine, by banning the Nag Hammadi Gospels was able to introduce a God who would condemn people to an eternity in Hell.
In the Gospel of Phillip from Nag Hammadi he says,"In the beginning God created humans.Now, however, humans are creating God.Such is the way of this world-humans invent gods and worship their creations.It would be better for such gods to worship humans.
You might wonder where I am going with this.
It seems to me that the God of the ancients was someone you could actually get a grip on, someone they knew personally.Then when Jesus of Nazareth came along he wasn't exactly what they thought he would be.
No wonder the Jews rejected him.
They expected the Son of God to be vengeful and tough as their Master of the Universe is.
I might be right off the track here, but I think that by reading and understanding as much as we can about hidden history we might just get an angle on the actual Creator.
shadows
22 February 2005
5 years 29 weeks
great blog Tox..... Kennc, shadow, eathling and I had much to say on this very topic in my blog.
As shadow points out in the old testiment about a god they new personaly.A vengeful god that was more then willing to smite people. The old testiment is a great read and I use the same as a reference. In many eastern philosophies and the christian bible, the one enemy of progression is the EGO. This is still a BLOCK to truth. EGO's weapons are greed, pride and all other self obsorbtion foolishness.
It still reigns supreme.
DISCLAIMER:the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and do not nesessarily reflect those of others.
24 June 2004
6 years 1 week
... is that they knew the god personally as in having met him.Now that would happen if some other entity came along and appeared so much more advanced that they were quite sure the entity was a god.
Maybe not, maybe they just thought of their gods personally, but I can't imagine that you would invent a god and then that god would be so damn cruel as the god of the Old Testament.
Then later on the idea of god changed because of time and distance from the event.
And then when they thought more logically they tried to make the god more attractive to people because that would get people in.
But then maybe the old god was fierce because the people themselves were fierce.
That's why I am convinced we will find the answer to all this in ancient history, and hidden history.
A good place to start is the Gnostic Gospels and all the banned books of the Bible, of which they were some and evidently the Nag Hammadi Gospels were as well.
If anyone knows the name of anymore, please tell me.
Just a thought.
shadows
22 February 2005
5 years 29 weeks
shadow....I know what you meant....and I meant the same. There are many referrences in the old testiment of physical contact with GOD as well as GOD's helpers.(angels)or subordinants as I preferr.
In my opinion, the old testiment and the new should be different books. They don't really have relevence to each other.
Times were harsh,(compared to what we know)but people were as good if not better then us.( jump on that one )Their lives were much simpliar and their priorities were of family and survival. But they did not know what we know as a good life so had no comparison.
Hidden history is exactly that......hidden.....there does exist,'out of bounds',areas of the vatican libraries. This is where we will find many answers. All we need to do is get the POPE to release it.
DISCLAIMER:the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and do not nesessarily reflect those of others.
24 June 2004
6 years 1 week
Well floppy that ain't gunna happen, I cannot see the pope releasing anything.
But there are still lots of stuff available with information in them if we only knew how to read it.
Keep me up to date about what you get onto.Thanks.
shadows
1 June 2004
2 years 16 weeks
Nothing new happens under the sun. History constantly repeats. Christianity is a lie, and unfortunately there are a lot of good hearted people who are conned by the rhetoric. Apart from the novel written recently about events long ago, what evidence is there of any of these way out stories.
"Stargate" has more credibility !!
If only they would open their eyes and look for themselves.
AAiek
22 February 2005
5 years 29 weeks
i'm not sure whether to laugh or cry at that......
did you just come out of a coma ?????
ps. take your own advice..'If only they would open their eyes and look for themselves'.
DISCLAIMER:the opinions and veiws in this post are mine only and do not nesessarily reflect those of others.
1 June 2004
2 years 16 weeks
But then again we either have first hand experience of Christian bullsh## or are part of it!
Do you know where you fit in????
AAiek
2 March 2005
6 years 37 weeks
AAiek
Neil Armstrong walking on the moon in 1969 wasn't new? A new born baby isn't new? Please be specific, "How does history repeat itself?" You have one of many valid perspectives and I'm not saying that you don't. I'm simply saying that in my opinion no evidence proves nothing. This could be interesting if you would be specific. I don't know!
What do you think?
kennc
1 May 2004
22 weeks 2 days
Walking on the Moon was new in a sense, no one that we remember had gone. On the other hand, it was bound to happen like in the past, humans always tried to reach and conquer beyond the impression of the limit of distance. That is how most of the planet ended up being inhabited to some degree.
History repeats itself in the sense that human psychology repeats itself. It may take a modernized form but the underlying principles have remained the same for at least 12000 years.
The A-bomb was new but it was only a new way to destroy and destruction is something we know very well how to reproduce and perpetuate.
In times of war, women were raped at the point of a sword, now they are raped at the point of a rifle. New techniques, same results.
A new born baby maybe new but a baby being born is old news.
22 November 2004
3 days 19 hours
You can argue this both ways, but going to the moon and back is not just better high-jumping. Especially the part where you get back, in a controlled fashion.
You could say that tensor calculus, and high preformance computing are just like counting pebbles, and that nothing has changed. And that is actually correct in some ways, that these methods are just more efficient ways of counting than with pebbles.
But the precision of understanding of what we do, and the precision of differentiating what we know, and what we don't know, is certainly vastly different than is has been in the past.
1 May 2004
22 weeks 2 days
All I am saying is that the same process brings to a material progress, not a psychological one.
In that sense, we inceasantly repeat the same patter that brings a refinement of the mechanisms and tools. I still contend that we are doing the same things albeit, as you aptly pointed out, in more sophisticated fashions.
You are still right though.
2 March 2005
6 years 37 weeks
thefloppy2
Only Christians relate the various cannons of the New Testament with the Hebrew Cannon (Old Testament). Only Christians call the Hebrew Cannon the Old Testament. The only relationships between them have been contrived by Christians. The Hebrew Cannon is generally divided by Hebrews into three sections: The Law; The Prophets; and The Writings.
kennc
1 May 2004
7 years 32 weeks
Scientists are exploring a Virtual Universe (Holographic)...one that is saturated with information. If we are indeed broadcast, then the old timeline can be thrown out. Evolution if anything is Devolution...and I am of the opinion that we all need to update our mentality. The very act of living is to learn...we are learning now of things never before thought by this segment of the monadic being...it is our time to set wings and spring from this planet to higher thought.