Actually, to take my post one step further - it is perhaps our imperfections which define us, as we strive to understand and learn acceptance. 

Many see our experiences here on earth as a deliberate attempt to take our consciousness and experience love, loss, death, happiness, joy without absolute knowledge that we are immortal.  We can take things on faith here, in the physcial world, but if we truly are immortal, that ultimate truth is hidden until our bodies pass away. 

So, the question, Chumley's, is why create an eye that is not perfect?  For this reason: that in being human we may learn valuable lessons.  That nothing stays the same or is permanent other than love.  Why would anyone take a trip down to the earth school of hard knocks and willingly wipe one's own memories, in order to experience joy and suffering of the earth plane?  Because we are told that this intense imperfect brief existence can give us more rapid progression of our spirituality and soul than almost anything else.

It is our imperfection and vulnerability that help us learn acceptance, humility and love.

Matthew

With regard to this thread, I'm still struggling with a question - Just what do we mean when we say "perfection"? This goes back to the idea of multiple truths, doesn't it?

As far as "intelligent design" is concerned, look at your own lifetimes - that's an example of "intelligent design". Or are you merely a ghost riding in a machine that is totally out of control? Howsabout the Spanish Inquisition? Definitely "intelligent design" of the same high quality as we find in modern warfare.

It seems to me that "intelligence" is in the creative impulse that begins with twists of probability space, ties them into knots, weaves the knots into a web, and then spins forth a universe, complete with critics whose function is to assist making it better (perhaps).

The essential processes of life involve quasi-crystallization of an extremely complex colloidial gel in which there are numerous highly specific catalysts. About 95% of this process is the same for us mobile critters with our diverse capabilities, as for formation of a calcite crystal hanging from a cave roof. It's only in the final few details that the iron in our bodies happens to be in the form of liquid blood as compared to ferric phosphates and sulfates tied to complex minerals.

Stromatalites (sp?) are non-aerobic lifeforms found from about the first 500 million years forward, and also found today. As I recall their life processes involve tradeoffs of  non-oxygen oxidizers through multi-valent transitions of iron  (Doc - this is your area more than mine - you might want to correct me here) leading to a stably repeatable growth. The same chemicals are found in the Martian "blueberries" that seem to be spread over that planet, and they might be identical in function, suggesting that we've found the Martians. If so, are they imperfect? How do we even evaluate?

dave

Hi scienetists do think they know it all i would like them to explain why ive seen my dads spirit on many occasions and when i saw my dads spirit as he lay in his coffin . I was not unconcious i beleive in the afterlife dads given me proof of this  because he told me if he diedf he would show me signs of the afterlife and he never said anything he did not mean .Scienetists are a bit like the old skeptics think they know it all but they dont  god bless juditha

Quote:

Absolutely. Very well put. More on this in a while.


Quote:


This so-called reasoning is based on the mis-assumption (which Chumley himself is moving away from, in fact, his anger is clearly projected upon fundamentalists who proclaim this belief) that 'God' is some external, supreme being, and therefore, all his actions and Creations must be perfect.

Thus, I'll point out that Dave is musing on the nature of 'perfection' (indeed, there can be no objective 'perfection', if you say such-and-such is 'imperfect', you're only speaking for yourself, such-and-such can be argued to be 'perfect', insofar as it is what it is, not what someone thinks it's 'supposed' to be).

While Matthew is pointing out the pedagogical or didactic modality by which physical incarnation imposes deliberate limitations, which is part and parcel of the existential value of man, of living as a human being on Earth (we're not human beings in a spiritual body, but spiritual beings in a human body). This is necessary to faciliate learning, evolution and meaningful assistantialty.

Indeed, from such an understanding, the 'imperfect' eye, body or situation, then becomes perfect (for its purpose), does it not? It's always a matter of willingness to see things from a useful, helpful perspective. There is no value to objectivity or subjectivity (of 'perfection', etc) per se, hence, no true meaning on it's own, only meaningful in the context of evolution, assistantiality, both of which are twin-expressions of Love.

And Matthew also points out that there is an incredible level and presence of consciousness and intelligence everywhere in the Universe, which is not always obvious or understood by many. And most truly, intelligence is at the heart of Evolution, not randomness.

While Chumley, is really expressing dissatisfaction for the religious dogmatic simplistic idea of an external, flawless God who is Creator and master of everything. The whole purpose of this thread is his saying, "Such an idea of God is BS!"


At this point, I'll just mention that Evolution as it really is on Earth and elsewhere on other planets, is always is mix of both 'Intelligent Design' (by specialized guides & helpers working on the energetics of morphological fields and directly on species DNA, as well as extraterrestrial assistance or interference, depending on intention or agenda, in the form of genetic manipulation and engineering), as well as the more 'natural' (but of course, intelligent design is also part of a greater scheme of Nature) or mundane modalities of evolution as understood by science (at least 'science' as understood by man on planet Earth at the current time, as compared to say the sciences of other planets), that is to say, due to the inherent genotypic and phenotypic variation within any given species population (due to spontaneous genetic mutation and genetic recombination by meiotic sexual reproduction), competition results in the differential rates of survival and of subsequent reproduction by those organisms best fitted to the environment (ie. natural selection), which over many generations results in the formation of new species (ie. evolution).

Of course this is happening, but hand-in-hand and together with intelligent design by guides & helpers and extraterestrial agencies. Why? Simply to speed up and to facilitate the apporpriate opportunities for incarnation and for evolution. It is a tricky matter for a group race to incarnate into available biological bodies suitable for the lessons the group race has to learn. Thus is the role of Intelligent Design.


In addition, with regards to the 'imperfections' or 'flaws' of the human body; because humanity in particular has gained the interest of so many different groups or races of beings of different natures and agendas, the human genome has been subjected to 'intelligent' or genetic manipulation multiple times throughout the history of man.

Regarding the adverse effects of consuming cooked foods, particularly cooked fats :

"Now, the understanding of the blending of these races and the importance of raw fats is then understood once the full shift through the Atlantean phase into current physical incarnation is understood. It had to do with becoming more physical, with acknowledging and working with the animal essence. This would be hidden from most of humanity by important Keys, and you are correct in a certain sense in that the ingestion of fat would moderate the nervous system, bringing it into a more aggressive, more fearful, more ego-oriented capacity when the fats were poorly absorbed, as a natural allergic response in the human nervous system. But this must not be understood from the context of anthropology but rather gene splicing and the deliberate attempt to manipulate human consciousness. The reason for this is obvious. The spiritual development, intellectual development, and potential for true awareness was perceived in the Atlantean; this was present to some extent on the Lemurian but not fully physicalized. The physicalization was on route during the Atlantean phase and it was necessary to make these changes if enslavement of humanity was to be a true potential for the future. At the same time the various races that engaged in the enterprise have some contributions to make because the blending of the shadow and the light, the ability for humans to overcome fear, to perceive true deep truth, and to learn the lessons of ego would be a major contribution to all beings (of the Universe) should humanity successfully survive this period."

As described in the passage above, there was genetic manipulation to deliberately exacerbate certain critical 'flaws' in man (genetic-biochemical-psychological-spiritual, all are closely inter-related and inter-causative for the temporary duration of the incarnation or joining of soul to physical body, naturally), in this case, to increase tendency towards fear and ego, when cooked (unnatural) fats are consumed. This was done by races or beings (note : nested or complex intrusion) that had less than benevolent intentions for humanity; but this was allowed by the guardians or higher guides & helpers of humanity, for the grander purpose of overcoming the fear & ego (should humanity succeed as a race in this, this is still up to every human being to decide on the outcome), and consequently a greater contribution to the Cosmos.

For the full article from which the above passage was excerpted from :
http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/HilarionDiet.html


The genetics and biological body of the first Homo sapiens sapiens Adam, ensouled by the being who would later incarnate as Moses, and later again as Jesus Christ (of course, the name 'Jesus' wasn't his actual name at the time), was in actuality a genetic hybrid of the extraterrestrial Nephilim with primitive man, or the more primitive Homo sapiens subspecies.

Click here to read about reincarnation of Adam as Moses and later as Jesus Christ :
http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/Hilarion_On_JesusChrist....

Click here to read about the Nephilim and Creation of Man (mouse cursor over bottom right of pic to expand it to original size) :
http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/Hilarion_on_Nephilim.gif


And where is the next step of Man's evolution? By all indications and evidence, it is towards what has been called the Serene ones (ie. once a human soul has evolved beyond the need for physical incarnation, or what some have called 'ascended masters', one charactersitic trait of such evolved human consciousnesses, is serenity), or as scientific name, the Homo sapiens serenissimus :

http://infinity.usanethosting.com/Heart.Of.God/Hilarion/Hilarion_Angels_Sereniss...

Hello, Betson.
*****************
Greetings Chumley,
Do you wish for the most ' practical' body that could be designed? A drawing was published several years ago of the results of a group of scientists who set out to do just that:--- the mouth and lips were over the stomach, the eye was on a stem protected by a pod over the center of the forehead, the body and limbs were shortened to half their average length, etc.
Have you seen diagrams of the shape formed by the solar winds as they wind around and away from earth?  Its on astronomy solar wind sites. It looks like a human in a cloak, beautiful.
How can you judge which is better? Perhaps we have capabilities or conditions that a squid does not, that must be taken into consideration.  Maybe when you know it all, you'll get to be in charge. Until then I enjoy your challenges.
bets
*****************
#1.) That "ideally designed creature" is horribly flawed in its own way, bets. (I've read about it too, BTW.) I wasn't impressed by it.
How long would it last, in physical combat with a healthy "standard human"? Not long, I'd wager. Or what about if it was attacked by a large animal in our ancestral enviroment? This "idealized creature" might well prosper in our modern, secure, petrochemical civilization, and might even live longer than we normally do.
But what about after the H-bombs fall? (Assuming they do...) I don't think that body design would lend itself to long survival in a "Mad Max" environment, bets.
This creature would be slower than we are, and probably physically weaker (those short limbs just wouldn't allow for much muscle mass!) So much for "perfect design".
Not to mention, it is BUTT-UGLY. (Although not much uglier, than a lot of modern people..!) Who'd go to bed with it, how would it pass on its "idealized genes" - even in our current secure environment?
What I'm speaking of, is OBVIOUS design flaws. (Like the structure of our eyes... or what about our hemorrhoidal veins, which are suited for a FOUR-LEGGED creature - not an upright one, the extra strain from gravity makes these veins the scourge of the human race! "God" could have done BETTER than that, bets. Doncha think?)
2.) Hmmm - "a human in a cloak?"
I take it you like to watch cloud formations, bets.
What's your stand on the "Face on Mars" while we're at it?
There's a nebula (remains of a sunlike star which expanded, burned out, and died in the distant past, just as OUR sun will in the distant future) called the "Eskimo Nebula" - because it DOES look vaguely reminiscent of and Eskimo in a fur-trimmed parka hood. So I presume the true name of "God" is... Nanook? (Or maybe it's an Eskimo angel.)
"Coincidence." It's in Webster's, bets - check it out.
'til next time,

B-man

Quote:


Maybe people did not pick that up because your original post is different to what Spitfire is saying? 

Poor human eyes design => No intelligent design => mechanistic materialism => No afterlife

Quote:


If you expect people to understand your view point, maybe you should not make an original post which comes to a different conclusion. Did you intend to change your viewpoint mid thread or was your original post just badly written?

You should also mention that many scientists do not believe in the pure materialistic paradigm when you say scientists do not believe in intelligent design. 

Anyone in for fish and chips?

Quote:


Good question.

The main focus for me is that the pure materialistic paradigm is slowly but surely loosing the gold medal for best theory.

The unfortunate thing is that the modern world seems reluctant to let is go, especially professional institutions that revolve around this current paradigm.

The barrier between science and religion is seen by many to be a clear dividing line, yet the only reason this is made into such a black/white competition is because many scientific areas are trying to barricade and root down science and thus making the modern scientific institutions ,whether by intention or not, into a religion.

True science by its nature, it the most chaotic object we can experience. It has to adapt to new data, change theories, accommodate new theories. It cannot be etched into stone.

So I wish only that frontier science such as theories that question the materialistic paradigm be given the open space and acceptance it struggles to find.

Although these new theories cannot define afterlife as a certainty they at the very least show that the universe holds many mysteries and secrets that materialist advocators should show respect for. For example aspects of consciousness, such as memory and the sensation of experiencing the outside reality, are increasingly becoming harder for medical and scientific people to place in a physical location.

Regards,
             Matt.


Quote:


Can I have a pea fritter with mine? 

I think this picture below sums up my view of someone trying to develope frontier science with the help of modern scientific institutes and publishers.