If you include the entire quote of what I was responding to, then you’d see that Morality is not part of the equation…and the reason for the faith explanation.
[quote]AMIRisSQUAT wrote:
Oh please shutup.
He didnt ask for a fucking sermon, he just asked if you beleived in one of the following :
1.Cheesecake angels
2.Fairies
3.God
4.Goblins and/or trolls with no hair
I choose the most unlikely scenario to be number -drumm roll- 1
There aint no fucking cheesecake angels. Theyre made of divine white chocolate.
Amir
Salvation is a gift, and earned by no one. ALL have sinned and come short. If you have ever thought of killing someone, or wished you could, or hated someone enough to kill…then you are a murderer. If you have lusted at someone, then you have sinned. Being moral is actually a Catch 22…its an impossiblity. No one can live morally. Its human nature to be vain, selfish, envious…Our salvation is bought and paid for with the blood of Jesus Christ. It is a gift. All of the prophets were hated and persecuted, as was Jesus, and his message was not a violent one, just a convicting one.
Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not yet seen. There was a man who walked tightrope across the Niagra Falls. He then did it with a will barrow. He then did it with 200 lbs. He then asked someone in the audience if he thought he could walk across with him in the wheelbarrow. The man replied yes. He asked him to get in the wheelbarrow. And he wouldn’t get in because he lacked faith.
When you plant a seed in the ground and water it. You have faith that it will grow into a big tree and produce fruit…and you get to realize that fruit.
Just because you can’t see the wind does not mean it isn’t there.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I am wondering why you are looking to this verse for an explanation of pi at all. This is discussing the building of King Solomon’s Temple. Explain to me why you are looking to this description of the building to equal pi exactly. If you know something I don’t, enlighten me. 30 Cubits is about 45 feet. 10 cubits is about 15 feet.
I’m using this verse because it’s the only one that gives both the diameter (10 cubits) and the circumference (30 cubits) of a circle. pi is the ratio between the diameter and the circumference of a circle. The unit of measure or the size of the circle does not matter, the ratio is always 3.14159… It is special in the fact that it is an irrational number, you cannot write it as the ratio of two integers.
It is often approximated by 22/7 (3 digits of precision) or 355/113 (six digits of precision). 30/10 (or 45/15) is an atrocious approximation. Even with lousy measuring tools, you should at least get 31 cubits (giving 3.1 as the approximation).
[/quote]
So, you have an issue because the measurements of the temple didn’t equal a perfect circle? Why do you believe that was the goal?
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
Have you ever considered that there may be things that are beyond our understanding? That there are things out there bigger & better than the human mind?
[/quote]
In spite of Reddog6376’s obvious disdain for Texans driving in CO. I agree with him 100%
I choose to believe that there is something out there that is smarter and more powerful than Humans. Why does that cause some folks so much anger?
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Those who do things purely because they have faith in the outcome or those “controlling” the outcome do so from a lack of understanding of the principles of what makes things work.
When a seed is planted one does not need faith that it will germinate if one understands what makes it germinate–to use your analogy.
Faith and religion are the byproduct of ignorance. It is through the thousands of years of ignorance (through no fault of human species other than natural technical/scientific progression) that we are still struggling to shrug off the shroud of ignorance. It is through learning and understanding our environment/universe that we can overcome this ignorance. This does not mean we can know everyting.
I don’t beleive in god not out of faith that there is no god but because I know from scientific fact that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed and I sum it up the philosophical equivalent of “which came first? The chiken or the egg?” Except I phrase it soemthing like this: “Which came first? Energy and matter or god”
Have you ever considered that there may be things that are beyond our understanding? That there are things out there bigger & better than the human mind?
[/quote]
Like the mind of an alien being? Yes, which is why I chose science as a career path.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Or ask yourself this question: We know energy cannot be created or destroyed so if it couldn’t have been destroyed then it must have always exisited.[/quote]
That’s not what we know. The theory that currently fits the most observation is the Big Bang theory. That posits that the universe “began” about 15 billion year ago.
As to what was before, there are many hypotheses. Here are a few of them:
Nothing. Space and time begin at the Big Bang, hence there was no “time” before so it is as illogical to ask what came before as it is to ask “What’s North of the North Pole?” Does not help much with figuring out the cause of the Big Bang, but it might not need one.
Our universe is just one of an infinity of them being created by colliding branes. This is from String Theory and if you don’t get it, well don’t worry, no one else does.
The universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster in his infinite noodly wisdom. Our best bet yet.
The degree of certainty is very low. If our current understanding is correct, we seem to be living in the “impurities” of the universe. Between dark matter and dark energy, it appears that 95% of creation is invisible to us.
As for God, the standard theological argument is that God is outside his own creation and not bound by any of it’s rules. Being outside space and time, he needs no creator and always was/is/will be. The Uncaused Cause, the Immobile Engine, etc. “Before Abraham was, I AM.”
[quote]Miserere wrote:
DeepSouth wrote:
Through non-biblical text Jesus has been verified and this includes his crucifixion on the cross.
Please tell us which texts are these, as the lack of historical proof is one of the arguments used by most atheists. The reasoning goes something like this (and I paraphrase):
The Romans had lists of everything. The Romans recorded everything. There were historians who lived in the time of Jesus who wrote plenty of books. If Jesus caused such a social commotion as the New Testament says he did, then his name should really have appeared on some official text somewhere.
As far as I’m aware, it hasn’t.[/quote]
If you read the book of Danial in his interpratation of nebachenezzers dream he layed out the march of empires from the babylonians,persia,greeks,romans, right down to our time. which is backed by historical fact. Isiaih also spelled this out also. and theres always josephus who is a roman historian who was present at the fall of jeruselum. who speaks of Jesus.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
So, you have an issue because the measurements of the temple didn’t equal a perfect circle? Why do you believe that was the goal?[/quote]
I simply gave that as an example of the Bible getting facts wrong that couldn’t be explained away by saying that they didn’t know what we know now when they wrote it. pi wasn’t “discovered”, it’s always been there.
You mentioned the rib story as an analogy for surgery or genetic engineering, saying that we must understand the Bible in term of the reality at the time it was written. I was simply pointing out another passage where the fact that it was written 2000 years ago does not explain the discrepancy.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Like the mind of an alien being? Yes, which is why I chose science as a career path.[/quote]
Have you ever wondered why things in nature work the way they do? Why humans evolved the way we have? Why E in fact does equal mc**2? Why mathmatics is so clean & elegant? Almost like somebody planned it that way…?
You remind me of scientists 2000 years ago, saying that the world was flat and they could prove it. Perhaps with another 2000 years of learning & understanding science will in fact be able to prove the existance of God.
[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
So, you have an issue because the measurements of the temple didn’t equal a perfect circle? Why do you believe that was the goal?
I simply gave that as an example of the Bible getting facts wrong that couldn’t be explained away by saying that they didn’t know what we know now when they wrote it. pi wasn’t “discovered”, it’s always been there.
You mentioned the rib story as an analogy for surgery or genetic engineering, saying that we must understand the Bible in term of the reality at the time it was written. I was simply pointing out another passage where the fact that it was written 2000 years ago does not explain the discrepancy.
[/quote]
What did it “get wrong”? It is describing the measurements that the temple was built in. Many masons believe there is a specific reason for each item listed. I have never heard of anyone using this in relationship to pi as if they failed to reach it. I don’t see why you are making that connection.
[quote]tjd772 wrote:
where are the opinions from the jews, muslims, mormons, etc.?[/quote]
Are Mormons allowed to left weights!!??
Just kidding. Actually, I was thinking the same thing. It would be interesting to hear what the Muslims have to say; surely we must have some on T-Nation.
[quote]reddog6376 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Like the mind of an alien being? Yes, which is why I chose science as a career path.
Have you ever wondered why things in nature work the way they do? Why humans evolved the way we have? Why E in fact does equal mc**2? Why mathmatics is so clean & elegant? Almost like somebody planned it that way…?
You remind me of scientists 2000 years ago, saying that the world was flat and they could prove it. Perhaps with another 2000 years of learning & understanding science will in fact be able to prove the existance of God. [/quote]
Mathematics is clean and elegant because it is a pure generalization of the natural world. If you look closely enough you will see that the natural world is not as clean or as elegant as the mathematics makes it look. In order for me to explain this to you would require a certain understanding of mathematics on your part. For instance, do you understand the concept of infinity? Mathematics cannot account for infinity, it can only generalize infinite series–i.e. limits that tend toward infinity. In the natural world there are many “missing pieces” that are unaccounted for by mathematics. We can only sum so far before we start to generalize those missing pieces because summing any further does not add to the precision of the “answer”. In science we call this uncertainty. In science you will always see an “answer” with a given uncertainty. This is one of the few things that science has given us. A sense that we can never be certain.
Let me make a further analogy. Mathematics is the “writing” to the “spoken language” of the universe. Just as a philosopher uses words to explain his or her endeavors so too a scientist will use mathematics to explain his or hers. Just as an observer of written language must use judgment to decide if what is written is logical so too must an observer of nature use judgment to decide if an observation is logical. It is a never ending cycle of statement and observation. After a while there is a point where any further argument becomes moot because there is no new information gleaned from it. This is where generally accepted “facts of nature” come from.
So, to finally answer your question. Yes, there are many unexplainable phenomena (gravity is one) that cannot be explained all the way. This is why the practice of science exists–to help answer and put the human mind at ease?or to make him or her squirm a little more when he or she realizes that there is no control.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
What did it “get wrong”?[/quote]
It says the shape is round. It says the diameter of the circle is 10 and the circumference 30. The ratio would then be 3.0. That is wrong. All circle have ratios of 3.1415926…
I’m not arguing masonry technique here. You simply cannot have a circle of diameter 10 with a circumference of 30, that’s all.
It’s not about reaching it or not. It’s just an example of some well known fact that it would have been nice for the Bible to get correctly. It being claimed to be inspired by an omnipotent, all-knowing perfect being.
[quote]Miserere wrote:
Just kidding. Actually, I was thinking the same thing. It would be interesting to hear what the Muslims have to say; surely we must have some on T-Nation.[/quote]
They don’t get into flamewars. Islam is a religion of peace, after all.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you look closely enough you will see that the natural world is not as clean or as elegant as the mathematics makes it look. [/quote]
That is simply your opinion…and I can assure you that not many agree with it. There is an equation for beauty. The Golden Proportion was used throughout Greek architecture, gained from Egyptian knowledge of mathematics. That speaks volums about the relationship between math and order in what should be a universe filled with utter chaos. You obviously choose to ignore that.
