Did God answer prayer for healing?

[SetiAlpha6]

The doctrine of “Original Sin” as it is taught, say in Calvinism, is wicked, and unfair to both God and children.

So, I might be right there with you on that one.

Calvinism, in general is wicked, in my opinion, and should be thrown into Hell where it belongs.

 

[Write4U]

The doctrine of “Original Sin” is not about that event.
That doctrine is about Adam and Eve’s Sin in willfully disobeying God to His face in the Garden of Eden.
And the teaching on that varies.

I believe that story is an allegory of humans becoming intelligent, i.e eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. This event can actually be traced to the mutative fusion of 2 chromosomes, that caused the emergence of Homo Sapiens (smart human).

I would suggest that no one alive today can ever be held personally responsible for that event either. Again, because of the very reasons you provided so well. If that is taught, I would personally regard that as a falsehood.
But it is more complex than what I just said. Because of the complexity and consequences of that singular event.

Yes, I can agree with that. But it was a rare beneficial genetic mutation , a lucky accident, that caused the relatively sudden increase in human intelligence.

If the account is true, then Adam and the very beautiful Eve, were also cast out of the Garden, away from the intimate presence of God. And it is figuratively described as “death”, to be separated from God. Because that condition is so terrible.

I believe that is an incorrect interpretation. Is human intelligence bad? I do agree that intelligence is a double-edged sword.

In Adam we all died, or in other words, in Adam we were all as a race separated from direct personal intimacy with God.

We are a race separated from all our genetic common ancestors. We are the only hominid with 23 pr genes.

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.

The Evidence:
http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

A new species of hominid, homo sapiens (smart human), able to manipulate tools and natural rhythms. Agriculture, Husbandry, Hoarding, Shelters, Entertainment, Art, the list is long and is indicative of how far we have strayed from the natural procession. Note that many much simpler organism already mastered many of these domestications, just not at the level of sophistication of humans.

We are not all guilty of committing Adam and Eve’s Sin. Only they are, but we do have to live with the consequences of what they did.

Depends on how you look at this. I believe intelligence and mastery of our environment is a great gift. The problem is, we don't always use our intelligence wisely. We have become too smart for our own good. This is contained in the allegory of being cast out from paradise (losing touch with Nature). IOW, we THINK we are independent and apart from Nature, but we are all part of Nature and subordinate to Natural laws. They are inescapable.

In the same way, you also may have to live with the consequences of some of the bad decisions your parents, or someone else has made, even though you are completely innocent yourself. It is just how life works.

I agree with that. Life is a stochastic evolutionary progression from the Now into the Future, thereby creating the Past (Time) in the process. So far, for all our great technical and artistic advancements we have managed to make a mess out of this Paradise we call earth. And we are beginning to pay the price for our hubris.

In that respect the biblical allegory is close to how (not when) things happened. But of course, I believe that the concept of a motivated God is superfluous. IMO, the term Nature describes the essence, the nature of the Universe and allows for a critical examination of how things happen in our observable reality.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

Love has nothing to do with Evil.
The antonym of Love is Hate. Hate exists because Love exists. Love and Hate are emotions.

The antonym of Evil is Good. Good exists because Evil exists. Good and Evil are characteristics.

Trump is an evil man who loves himself!

In my Universe...

Both Love and Hate are indeed emotions, but they are also real choices.

No one has to Hate.

A person can choose to Hate someone who does not legitimately deserve it.

No one has to Love.

A person can choose to Love someone who does not legitimately deserve it. Perhaps in a similar way that God Loves us!

They are both choices.

I did not “fall in love” with my wife against my will.

It was a choice I made.

I specifically and deliberately chose her and hand picked her out from millions of other choices.

She did the same thing with me. But I obviously got the better end of the deal.

And I also really do regard Hate as being equivalent to Evil. That is why I used Evil as the antonym of Love.

I also regard Love as being equivalent to Good.

And even Good and God as equivalents.

Notice, there is only one letter differentiating the two. Hey, I just thunk that up!

But we are just kicking words around on this point.

There are a few exceptions...

To Love Evil is Evil.
To Hate Evil is Good

(PS: Don’t tell anyone, but I never voted for Trump! Just our little secret.)

 

[SetiAlpha6]

But it was a rare beneficial genetic mutation , a lucky accident, that caused the relatively sudden increase in human intelligence.

Can you please prove that?

Or is that just your belief?

 

[SetiAlpha6]

We are a race separated from all our genetic common ancestors. We are the only hominid with 23 pr genes. The Evidence:
http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

Naturalism, an unproven Atheistic belief system, is exclusively being used to interpret the data.

No other views or methods are even allowed to have a voice in the room. Only one is allowed to speak in the classroom, all must bow down to Naturalism, or be insulted and ridiculed.

Freedom of thought not allowed!!!

This is how Atheism is taught, and force fed to children in schools, by masquerading as Scientific fact.

When viewed through a Theistic belief system, the interpretations of the same data are very different.

 

[Write4U]

Can you please prove that?

Or is that just your belief?

I gave you the link. I'll repost it.

Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
Alec MacAndrew

Introduction

All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong.

Let us re-iterate what we find on human chromosome 2. Its centromere is at the same place as the chimpanzee chromosome 2p as determined by sequence similarity. Even more telling is the fact that on the 2q arm of the human chromosome 2 is the unmistakable remains of the original chromosome centromere of the common ancestor of human and chimp 2q chromosome, at the same position as the chimp 2q centromere (this structure in humans no longer acts as a centromere for chromosome 2.

Conclusion

The evidence that human chromosome 2 is a fusion of two of the common ancestor's chromosomes is overwhelming.

http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

 

[Write4U]

Freedom of thought not allowed!!!
This is how Atheism is taught, and force fed, to children in schools, by masquerading as Scientific fact.
When viewed through a Theistic belief system, the interpretations of the same data are very different.

You have this exactly backward.
Atheism and by extension Naturalism, relies on scientific facts and Science is always open to revision and/or refinement.i.e. Freedom of thought and correction (the scientific method).

It is Theism that is rigid. Scripture is rigid in scope and interpretation.

Example, Lutheranism:

Lutheranism is one of the largest branches of Protestantism that identifies with the teachings of Jesus Christ and was founded by Martin Luther, a 16th-century German reformer whose efforts to reform the theology and practice of the church launched the Protestant Reformation.

The reaction of the government and church authorities to the international spread of his writings, beginning with the 95 Theses, divided Western Christianity.[1] During the Reformation, Lutheranism became the state religion of numerous states of Northern Europe, especially in northern Germany and the Nordic countries. Lutheran clergy became civil servants and the Lutheran churches became part of the state.[2]

The split between the Lutherans and the Roman Catholics was made public and clear with the 1521 Edict of Worms: the edicts of the Diet condemned Luther and officially banned citizens of the Holy Roman Empire from defending or propagating his ideas, subjecting advocates of Lutheranism to forfeiture of all property, half of the seized property to be forfeited to the imperial government and the remaining half forfeit to the party who brought the accusation.[3]

If we compare just the Judeo-Christian religions, they have been at war over the same God for 2000 years.

Calvinism, in general is wicked, in my opinion, and should be thrown into Hell where it belongs

Those are your words.....

There is no freedom of thought allowed in religion!!!

OTOH, Science and the mathematics of Science are universally accepted. No one ever went to war over the concept that 2 + 2 = 4. This has allowed science to make many revisions in Universal "origins", Universal "laws", and Universal "functions", each revision a closer symbolic approximation and representation of axiomatic (proven) truths.

There is total freedom of thought but Mainstream Scientific Theory is achieved only by general consensus.

 

[Write4U]

(PS: Don’t tell anyone, but I never voted for Trump! Just our little secret.)

I applaud you!!! ...................

 

[SetiAlpha6]

You have this exactly backward.
Atheism relies on scientific facts and Science is always open to revision and/or refinement.i.e. Freedom of thought.

It is Theism that is rigid. Scripture is rigid in scope and interpretation.

Example, Lutheranism:

If we compare just the Judeo-Christian religions, they have been at war over the same God for 2000 years.

There is no freedom of thought allowed in religion!!!

OTOH, Science and the mathematics of Science are universally accepted. No one ever went to war over the concept that 2 + 2 = 4. This has allowed science to make many revisions in Universal "origins", Universal Laws, and Universal functions, each revision a closer symbolic approximation and representation of axiomatic truths.

There is total freedom of thought but Mainstream Scientific Theory is achieved only by general consensus.

Really?

That’s a good story!

Are any Theistic interpretations allowed in discussions leading up to the general Atheistic Naturalistic consensus?

No!

Both the discussion and consensus must be Atheistic Naturalism exclusively!

Atheistic Naturalism is always forced onto the data.

Is Theism ever allowed to interpret the data in the classroom?

No!

Only Atheistic Naturalistc interpretations are allowed!

Atheistic Naturalistic interpretations are always forced onto the data.

Certainly, you can see this!

 

[SetiAlpha6]

I applaud you!!! ...................

Thanks! But it was supposed to be our little secret!
...and that’s kind of a big guy!

...and I don’t want the mob to come get me!

(Be strong Seti, be strong!)

 

[Write4U]

Thanks! But it was supposed to be our little secret!
...and that’s kind of a big guy!
...and I don’t want the mob to come get me!

Now that's interesting. Which mob are you talking about? The non-vaccers? I am not too worried about them.
They will get sick and die or recover and become immune. If they want to take that route, good luck.

(Be strong Seti, be strong!)

You are showing strength of clear thought and conviction. Now is not the time to be afraid of anything but that little invisible enemy that is hell-bent on eradicating every living human it can infect. There is no reasoning with that kind of enemy. Active defenses and complete control of the virus as the primary threat are the only effective response to a pandemic. The virus never gets tired and will take every opportunity to invade, and invade, and invade. Until it is eradicated. The sooner, the SAFER!

There is a real threat of an evolving strain that is resistant to any vaccination and is an existential threat to mankind.
It won't be the first time in the history of the earth that an entire species has fallen victim to a bacterial or viral organism.

Shout your decision from the rooftops! You are being a responsible citizen who cares for his country and fellow citizens. You can hold your head high. You have my respect........

 

[Write4U]

Are any Theistic interpretations allowed in discussions leading up to the general Atheistic Naturalistic consensus?

They were for 2000 years and found scientifically wanting.

Note: I am not talking about some of the moral lessons that are contained in scripture. I am sure it has had an influence on current modern morals. I am only talking about the scientific accuracy of scripture and that has been found inaccurate as a Scientific Document.

So, Theists need to learn to live in harmony with Science, because Science's only task is to analyze and record observable Natural phenomena, in an objective manner, without any prejudicial morality. Nature is neither good, not bad. It is stochastic and absolutely neutral.

Life must take life in the interest of life itself, that is the moral of Nature (as evident by Covid). Viruses are not bad, they want to live. Insects aren't bad, they want to live. To the viruses and bacteria humans are the mortal enemy, cause human want to live.
That is the nature of Nature. Every organism has an equal chance to exist if it survives "natural selection".

The Hellstrom Chronicle

 

[sideshowbob]

Are any Theistic interpretations allowed in discussions leading up to the general Atheistic Naturalistic consensus?

It's a logical, scientific consensus, based on evidence.

Is Theism ever allowed to interpret the data in the classroom?

Which brand of theism would you use? In Canada, Roman Catholicism is the predominant brand. In Iran, Islam is the predominant brand. In Utah, Mormonism is the predominant brand. Would you have children taught different "truths" in different places?

 

[Beaconator]

The superanatural doesn't exist. That means God doesn't exist either.

The supernatural does exist, but I’m not so sure about god

 

[Write4U]

The supernatural does exist, but I’m not so sure about god

Why must it be "supernatural"? Why not "metaphysical"? That is a Natural term and has meaning in science.

Supernatural by definition is unmeasurable as it does not exist in this reality. It is removed from any kind of observation or measurement, even by inference.

There are many metaphysical objects. They usually are the emergent potentials from complex patterns, such as thought or a condition which is defined by the suffix; " something-ness".

What is the suffix "something-ness" mean?

Quality and State

xxxx-ness. a native English suffix attached to adjectives and participles, forming abstract nouns denoting quality and state (and often, by extension, something exemplifying a quality or state): darkness; goodness; kindness; obligingness; preparedness.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/-ness
But that does not make them supernatural objects, they are metaphysical (abstract) potentials.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

I gave you the link. I'll repost it.

Human Chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes
Alec MacAndrew

Introduction

Conclusion
http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

Similar design is attributed to two aspects...

1) Both have the same Designer (God)
2) Both were designed to live in the same environment.

Evolution is occurring...

Only in reverse!

Beneficial mutations can occur but they are extremely rare.

The majority of mutations are harmful.

Harmful mutations are not selected out or rejected, because they are often too minor to be fatal, and to minor to affect the reproduction of the species.

Millions of people are walking around the Earth right now with harmful genetic mutations, but they can reproduce just fine!

Over time, more harmful mutations are passed on than beneficial ones, which cumulatively cause the eventual extinction of the species.

If this is true, then the number of species on the Earth should be reducing over time.

Which is exactly what we actually do see.

Genetic Dilution is also going on, and it is not ultimately beneficial. It can have temporarily benefits, but Genetic Dilution causes the permanent loss of genetic code over time. And when it is lost, it is lost forever!

With both of these occurring, God’s original design information, the original genetic code, is cumulatively corrupted and lost over time, not gained.

The species extinction rate of 99% backs this up perfectly. We only have 1% left to go!

If evolution ultimately causes increased survival, stronger creatures, and more heathy variations, then the number of species should be exponentially growing in number and in frequency, but it is not.

Right now, more species are going extinct than are being created.

Extrapolate that singular fact into the future, and you have the eventual extinction of all life on this planet.

With Evolution as the cause!

 

[Write4U]

Similar design is attributed to two aspects...
1) Both have the same Designer (God)
2) Both were designed to live in the same environment.

No, they had a common ancestor. And both were adapted by natural selection to the same environment, over hundreds of thousands of years.

Evolution is occurring...

True.

Only in reverse!

No, evolution is always toward greater complexity or efficiency.
Reverse evolution is "devolution" (descent or degeneration to a lower or worse state).

Beneficial mutations can occur but they are extremely rare.

I agree

The majority of mutations are harmful

I agree, but note that most large mutations (such as the fusion of human chromosome 2) are rare. The most common evolutionary changes are due to other factors, such as gradual genetic drift (very small mutations) over long periods of time.

Evolutionary processes:

mutation.
genetic drift.
inbreeding.
migration.
natural selection.
sexual selection.

http://www.uvm.edu/~lehiggin/teaching/bio1/evol_process.html

The species extinction rate of 99% backs this up perfectly. We only have 1% left to go!

No, that is using the wrong interpretation of the data. New species emerge everyday also.
Example: new strains of Covid, and growing exponentially (genetic drift)

If evolution ultimately causes increased survival, stronger creatures, and more healthy variations, then the number of species should be exponentially growing in number and in frequency, but it is not.

No species have no specific growth rate. Populations do.

Examples : Mankind, Insects, Bacteria and Viruses.

Right now, more species are going extinct than are being created.

That may be true but the ones that experience steady growth of any percentage will grow exponentially in numbers.
Example: Human population is growing @ + 1 %, which means a doubling every 70 years. 8 billion today, 16 billion in 70 years, 32 billion in 140 years (watch the Professor Albert Bartlett lecture on the exponential function)

Recent figures indicate that there are

more than 200 million insects for each human on the planet! A recent article in The New York Times claimed that the world holds 300 pounds of insects for every pound of humans.

Numbers of Insects (Species and Individuals)

It has long been recognized and documented that insects are the most diverse group of organisms, meaning that the numbers of species of insects are more than any other group. In the world, some 900 thousand different kinds of living insects are known. This representation approximates 80 percent of the world's species. The true figure of living species of insects can only be estimated from present and past studies.

Most authorities agree that there are more insect species that have not been described (named by science) than there are insect species that have been previously named. Conservative estimates suggest that this figure is 2 million, but estimates extend to 30 million.

In the last decade, much attention has been given to the entomofauna that exists in the canopies of tropical forests of the world. From studies conducted by Terry Erwin of the Smithsonian Institution's Department of Entomology in Latin American forest canopies, the number of living species of insects has been estimated to be 30 million.

Insects also probably have the largest biomass of the terrestrial animals. At any time, it is estimated that there are some 10 quintillion (10,000,000,000,000,000,000) individual insects alive.

https://www.si.edu/spotlight/buginfo/bugnos

Extrapolate that singular fact into the future, and you have the eventual extinction of all life on this planet.

With Evolution as the cause!

Nooo, quite the opposite.
As the Hellstrom Chronicle posits: there are two species that are definitely on the increase; Humans and Insects.
a) Humans, because we can control our environment to some extent.
b) Insects, because they can adapt to anything we do to the environment.

 

[SetiAlpha6]

No, they had a common ancestor. And both were adapted by natural selection to the same environment, over hundreds of thousands of years.
True.
No, evolution is always toward greater complexity or efficiency.
Reverse evolution is "devolution" (descent or degeneration to a lower or worse state).
I agree I agree, but note that most large mutations (such as the fusion of human chromosome 2) are rare. The most common evolutionary changes are due to other factors, such as gradual genetic drift (very small mutations) over long periods of time.

Evolutionary processes:

http://www.uvm.edu/~lehiggin/teaching/bio1/evol_process.html
No, that is using the wrong interpretation of the data. New species emerge everyday also.
Example: new strains of Covid, and growing exponentially (genetic drift)
No species have no specific growth rate. Populations do.

Examples : Mankind, Insects, Bacteria and Viruses.
That may be true but the ones that experience steady growth of any percentage will grow exponentially in numbers.
Example: Human population is growing @ + 1 %, which means a doubling every 70 years. 8 billion today, 16 billion in 70 years, 32 billion in 140 years (watch the Professor Albert Bartlett lecture on the exponential function)
Numbers of Insects (Species and Individuals)
https://www.si.edu/spotlight/buginfo/bugnos
Nooo, quite the opposite.
As the Hellstrom Chronicle posits: there are two species that are definitely on the increase; Humans and Insects.
a) Humans, because we can control our environment to some extent.
b) Insects, because they can adapt to anything we do to the environment.

You have a right to and are welcome to your own personal opinion.

Not all Scientists would agree with you.

The “Consensus” of what is the popular view today, is very often not the truth of tomorrow.

I have no problem with you, holding your view.

I do have a problem with the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines, such as education, to force feed your view on our children.

 

[sideshowbob]

Not all Scientists would agree with you.

You're the last person who should be commenting on scientific consensus. You probably think there are scientists who are giving up on evolution.

The “Consensus” of what is the popular view today, is very often not the truth of tomorrow.

Again, that's how science works. It's self-correcting.

Religion, on the other hand, was wrong yesterday, is still wrong today and will still be wrong tomorrow.

I do have a problem with the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines, such as education, to force feed your view on our children.

That's why we oppose creationism in schools.

 

[Write4U]

I do have a problem with the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines, such as education, to force feed your view on our children.

Because it is science. Can you do better than the people who study natural phenomena.

And what justifies the hijacking of taxpayer supported machines such as education, to force feeding non scientific theistic views on our children?

The concept of "intelligent design" and "irreducible complexity" has been scientifically debunked (with evidence) in a court of law. Do you object to courts of law? Do you object to the "establishment clause"?

All you are doing here is refusing to accept the best possible scientific explanation of people who study these things.

Look at the refusal to believe science about Covid and the results of ignoring the scientist's warnings about the evolution and speciation of organisms.

At some point you need to accept the scientific evidence.


p.s. Note: I am not commenting on the spiritual part of "describing" subjective reality.