Welcome to BookBoardz.com!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Re Science and God

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2
   Book Forums (Home) -> CS Lewis RSS
Next:  Disappearing Army? LWW Movie Spoilers  
Author Message
darylgene

External


Since: Mar 15, 2005
Posts: 128



(Msg. 16) Posted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Re Science and God [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: alt>books>cs-lewis (more info?)

Peter B. Juul wrote:

>
> The author of this article puts forth a strawman argument of almost
> criminal proportions. He rants on and on about Collins' final
> conversion at the foot of a waterfall, completely ignoring the fact (a
> fact he has himself relayed to us) that Collins did not convert ONLY
> because he saw this waterfall.
>

I would have to say the event that brought me back to God's love, after
twenty years ardently rejecting it, was at least as foolish looking to
someone who might try to belittle it. I was simply looking at a
billboard, with a picture of a hungry man.

I really feel pity for these people, I wonder if they can ever sense
the depth of poetry and the rich connotive power of language. Could a
sunset ever cause them to recall a lost childhood friend, or a
breakfast overlooking the ocean? What shallow, prosaic lives they must
lead if they cannot understand how a chance circumstance could resonate
in the mind and spirt of another. I am thankful I do not inhabit their
world.

Daryl

 >> Stay informed about: Re Science and God 
Back to top
Login to vote
user311

External


Since: Oct 06, 2004
Posts: 74



(Msg. 17) Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 11:36 am
Post subject: Re: Re Science and God [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

"darylgene@aol.com" <darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com> writes:

> I would have to say the event that brought me back to God's love, after
> twenty years ardently rejecting it, was at least as foolish looking to
> someone who might try to belittle it. I was simply looking at a
> billboard, with a picture of a hungry man.

And I have myself been there as well. In my case it was a peculiar
weather phenomenon - but just at the right time and place to give
deep meaning to me specifically.

I don't much argue against Harris' lack of understanding of the power
of a sudden epiphany (can they be un-sudden?). That is to be
expected. I complain, because Harris himself mentions Collins'
relation to the writings of Lewis, but totally ignores this, when he
finds something that seems to him ridiculous.

You can always grap a single event in a line and paint it
ridiculous. It's a ridiculous notion that Isaac Newton thought of the
whole theory of gravity because he saw an apple fall to the
ground. It's about as ridiculous as Einstein figuring out E=MC^2 while
trying to put bubbles into beer.

Life is made up of single ridiculous moments that our brains
feverishly try to turn into something meaningful. Sometimes it works.

--
Peter B. Juul, o.-.o "Well," said Aslan, "I suppose we could try lasers."
The RockBear. ((^))
I speak only 0}._.{0
for myself. O/ \O

 >> Stay informed about: Re Science and God 
Back to top
Login to vote
user299

External


Since: Oct 02, 2003
Posts: 52



(Msg. 18) Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Re Science and God [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

AJA <ahnemann.DeleteThis@optonline.net> observed
>> <darylgene.DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:1154905867.049189.237110@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> Speaking of coincidence, waiting to get my hair cut I pick up a July
>>> issue (didn't notice the exact date) of Time magazine. Inside is an
>>> article about Francis Collins one of the lead biologists of the Human
>>> Genome Project, who is also an evengelical Christian. He has written a
>>> book about the genetic code titled "The Language of God."
>
>Wow. Take a look at the reviews in Amazon.com. I've ordered this book.
>Our Jack is certainly still bringing the message! Blessings,
>Ann

Thanks for that - me too!

Mike

--
Michael J Davis

<><
"If you are offended by anything, whether intended or
unintended, you do not know the way of peace..."
St. Maximus the Confessor
<><
 >> Stay informed about: Re Science and God 
Back to top
Login to vote
Bree

External


Since: Apr 29, 2006
Posts: 10



(Msg. 19) Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:42 pm
Post subject: Re: Re Science and God [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 08:50:20 -0400, AJA wrote:

> Welcome back, Mary.


Thanks. Smile)))


Bree
---

> As to the question, we're all in Shadowlands here!
> Blessings,
> Ann
>
>>> *to answer a question that I missed when it was written as to what
>>> parallell worlds have to do with heaven; just that they would provide a
>>> reasonable locale,
>>
>> MIght fit well with the Hindu/Buddhist system of multiple heavens and
>> hells
>> (all temporary, rather like purgatories tho some pleasant).
>>
 >> Stay informed about: Re Science and God 
Back to top
Login to vote
darylgene

External


Since: Mar 15, 2005
Posts: 128



(Msg. 20) Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:50 am
Post subject: Re: Re Science and God [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

David Thuleen wrote:
> >

>
> In the cases of Newton and Einstein, these details about apples and
> beer and merely biographical trivia, and have absolutely no bearing on
> the truth or falsehood of the assertions (i.e., theories) that they
> inspired. The only information that matters is whether the theories
> make correct predictions that other theories do not make. Since the
> apples and beer are recognized as irrelevant to the evaluation of the
> truth, it does no harm to include them.
>
> If the inspiration (apples, beer, waterfalls) were used in any way to
> try to justify the assertion, that would be a serious mistake.
>

Well, yes and no.
If you are asserting that the inspiration provides some sort of
scientific, physical proof, of course it doesn't. The only kind of
proof, however, that has any sort of spiritual meaning is the sort of
experiential proof such moments provide. God picks His spots, there is
an instant when there is an almost audible 'SEE' . An intellectual
acknowledgement that some superior being exists may leave the door open
for God to come in, but it does not, in itself, accomplish anything
useful. In this case then, the inspiration may justify the assertion,
there is communication; communication is self evident proof of a
communicator. Of course you can always hang up the phone.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Re Science and God 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
   Book Forums (Home) -> CS Lewis All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]