Up@dawn 2.0

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Discussion questions for feb 2 
1 - i think it's funny that he states such polarizing views. He wants to be a god, abut he looks at the world in a way that a humble scientist would not like he was the one who created it, or holds all the answers in his hand. 
Considering his backstory of being almost royalty, i can understand that he seemingly didn't want to give up his "life" in a way, but at the same time, he did not want to be the only one so he just said that at one time everyone was like him. He has a weird thought process in regards to how he is trying to be humble though his science, and his saying that everyone was gods at some point. But then, why would he still be a god? And not anyone else? Would he consider the people in charge of his time (the leaders and royalty) as gods ass well? Maybe that's what he is thinking, and he is out like the supreme leader in any way. 

2 - I think that the idea of reincarnation is an interesting thought. I also believe that there is a difference between knowing something, and believing in something. I guess the two could be separated by a physical representation that can be repetitively studied and quantified. You can study the physical representation of some beliefs as factual evidence, but it becomes harder to "prove" that the factual evidence leads to your personal belief. I would argue that when you are looking at religion you can actually look at that word as characteristic of many things that we do not nessesarily consider under that particular term. I would say that the tipical religions and or cultures are ways to explain the factual evidence that we study what we can observe in our world today. Considering that thought, i would venture to say that the religion of science is yet another way to explain what we observe in the world today. If we look at the history of science we find that the "reality" that this idea of science tends to explain can in fact change, and it is interesting that something that is considered so factual indeed could in fact be proven wrong. 
I say all that to say that in regards to reincarnation, if that is yet another way to explain what we see in our world then it would then fit in the category of things that one can not simply "prove". 

3 - I personally do not be believe in the creation idea of the Big Bang or the Big Crunch. I believe in an intellegent creator in whose image I believe to be created. I do not think that an accidental creation story does not naturally lead to a inspirational purpose in life for those of us living in the past, present, or future. I believe that the idea of being personally created and thought out by an intellegent creator as is stated in Jeremiah 1:5 "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb," is in and of itself an inspiration to how and why we should live our lives.

Nathan Stickles 

No comments:

Post a Comment