Good and Evil

[Guest Scytale]

Paul didn't die in the desert but when he went out into it he meant to-it was only afterwards he realised that he still couldn't leave the universe behind with Alia.

Oh, here's the proof for evolution: Genes are all linked throughout the species and have been proven to change through the generations through experiments in natural selection with butterflies. And rabbits were nearly all wiped out by a killer disease, but the ones that survived, and now their decendants too, are resistant because they happened to have an allele that made them resistant. All the observational evidence, including geological from where they found the fossils in the rocks, show a gradual change over time. Animals that were thought to be extinct or evolved have been found in isolated communities where the environment hasn't changed (just in line with evolution). Extinction's a fact. And humans have appendixes and tailbones. I'm Catholic by the way so don't make evolution out to be an alternative atheistic religion.

[garth]

A wise Bene Gesserit once said:

"All religions have an unspoken commandment: Thou shalt not question!"

[Acriku]

Good explanation Scytale, and I agree with you to not let evolutionism coincide with atheism, because I believe in a God, but I also believe in evolutionism. I just have a more open mind about different subjects.

[Acriku]

Man this has got to be a record! This being the 128th post, sheeeeeeeeesh. What a thread eh?

[Mahdi]

Did I say Jesus was evil? No, you're the one who said Paul was evil, and I pointed out that there is no difference between the deaths his Church commited in his name (Which you say make him evil) and the deaths caused in the name of Jesus (which you say is good) ny his Church.

I personally believe in God, but I'm not ignorant of facts, and I keep an open mind. We don't know for SURE that Jesus was truly the son of god. We don't know for SURE that he made those miracles. All we know is what is is written that he did. We take the rest in faith, which is exactly the same as the followers of Maud'dib did. They took it on faith. One of your biggest arguements (even though it doesn't actually deal with the fact that if you think one is evil for something, the other must be) is that Paul knew he was a false prophet. There are two arguements again'st that:

1) Paul could see the possible futures. People who see the future are prophets. Simple as that.

2) For all we know, Jesus was a false prophet too, and he knew it.

[Acriku]

I couldn't agree with you more Mahdi. Edric is exercising the bare assertion fallacy - a fallacy of reasoning in which the user gives no reasons at all for his position other than the fact that he says so. Just because the Bible says so, doesn't NECESSARILY mean it's the truth.

[garth]

When we say Paul was a false "prophet" we mean that he wasn't divinely inspired or receiving messages from God. No one doubts that he's a prophet in the sense of being able to foretell the future.

"Ghenghis......Khan? Was he of the Sardaukar m'Lord?" (Stilgar)

"Oh, long before that. He killed.....perhaps four million." (Paul)

"He must've had formidable weaponry to kill that many, sire. Lasbeams, perhaps, or....." (Stilgar)

"He didn't kill them himself, Stil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions." (Paul)

~ p.135 Dune Messiah (Ace paperback version)

From this I can only conclude that Paul was directly behind the orders given to his legions to depopulate planets. Since the Quizarate wasn't giving the orders I assume they followed in the Fremen Legions' path, pacifying and "bringing into the shining light of Muad'dib" the populace that wasn't already slaughtered.

Other than that, I agree with you Mahdi. There is no way we can ever be 100% certain of Jesus' divinity, or any other self-proclaimed prophet for that matter.

[ordos45]

evolutionism is a bunch of hooey. They actually have more evidence to support the bible's version of how earth fromed and when then they do evolution. Evolution is blind faith because in science you must observe hypothesize and etc before theory is fact. U can't experiment with evolution therefor it is just a theory. Radio carbon dating btw is frequently innacurate,m carbon does not have a steady decay rate. Oh and the ehole Darwin guy. Darwin was a drunk working on ship who screwed the Captain's wife. I'm not lying about that either. Evolution is more religion than science.

In fact King James Version of the book of revelation: in the last days will come scoffers.

BTW Go Edric you're on a role. Oh and everyone I've sat through a 10 hour seminar before on creation versus evolution. Trust me more evidence for creation.

Religion: SOmething accepted without question, faith, complete trust in something.

Evolution is accepted without question with no experiments to prove it. Its blind Faith.

So if the Supreme Court banned religion in schools why do they still teach evolution?

Evolution is circular reasoning to.

Q. How do we know how old fossils are in museums?

Answer from tour guide: By the rock layer they are found in.

Q. How do we know how old the rock layer is then?

A. By the fossils we find in it.

The geologic column is a fake.

Grand Canyon has the most exposed sediments in world. They are not in the supposed right order of the geologic column, and do not include all the portions of it. Also the sediments are all mixed up as if strewn around by a cataclysmic event aka Noah's Flood.

Next up Mount Saint Helens: Look how much it changed and uprooted and buried. Imagine it a million fold...I give you the grand canyon.

Did you know there are tropical plants in the arctic? Frozen there. They've fopund way more frozen animals than just one mammoth. 8 foot long beavers, 18 inch cockroaches, get my point?

Also there is evidence in amber (more % O2 then now) to prove a seventh layer in Earth's atmosphere. A layer of water making the entire planet a greenhouse with 35% oxygen instead of the 21% now. Layer bursts, Noah's flood, world changed forever.

Oh and textbooks in schools. They almost all for each company have varying dates on evolution and how long what took to evolve.

And Lucy the missing link, the guy who found the bones found different monkey bones from different monkey types and put them together and found the skull a mile and a half away. He even tells that he lied about Lucy in a later interview.

Glen Rose, Texas. In stream beds they have human footprints and dino foot prints side by side. Scientists tested it and they are real.

One more thing. Fossils are like petrified forests. It doesn't take long to turn to stone. My neighbors dug up a section near their house and found the stakes they'de driven in only years earlier turned to stone. Happens to skeletons in countries a lot of time to. So once again I besseech u to look at the facts before spouting all this theory.

So before you start spouting THEORY (evolution) as truth look for answers first.

[Edric O]

Guys, don't start tearing me apart before I have a chance to answer! Just remember that I argue fiercly when I'm against a crowd. If atheists team up against me, this discussion will never end. ;)

First of all, EXATREIDES STARTED IT. So don't act as if I insulted you first! I was merely responding to ExAtreides. Read his posts and imagine you're a Christian. You'll understand. My reply to him was simple and appeared ignorant because his claims were ignorant.

MoiDib, don't assume that I don't know anything about evolution. I was an atheist until 4 years ago. When I started seeing the holes in evolutionism, it still took me nearly a year to become a Christian. It is hard to give up your beliefs. And evolutionism is a belief like any other. And it DOES have one comandment: Thou shall not question. :) Fossiles are of course made in many different ways, from dead creatures that once lived(usually when they are covered by sediments). And gene mutations are a proven fact. But evolutionism is not the only way to explain those things. For example, how do you know that the "6 days" of the Creation were not actually millions of years? During the first days there was no Sun, so the concept of "day" could have meant anything. Oh and btw, the Bible says the God "put the Sun in the sky". It doesn't mention anything about the Sun rotating around the Earh (as the Iquisition claimed). God might have co-ordonated a high-speed evolution. And no, don't start talking about the Evolution movie! By a "high-speed evolution" I mean that the estimated age of the Earth (4.5 billion years) might be just 1 billion years. That's high-speed, not what you can see in a ridiculous comedy movie. ;)

MoiDib, read those versets again. They are very, very, very, very vague. They could be methaphores, or just an "artistic touch" without meaning. The medieval Catholic Chrurch WANTED the Earth to be the center of the Universe, so they interpreted those vague versets as proof of that. Oh, and the Inquisition is part of the *smart* people that I was talking about in my previous post.

Now to answer your question: the Holy Bible is made of many "books". Each book is just that, a separate book. The Bible is actually a collection of many books. And each book was written in a different time, by a different person. The first (and most ancient) ones have origins lost in time. They were probably written in the time of Moses.

[Acriku]

Ok thanks for answering Edric. And I apologize, I realize I did sound a little aggressive towards you Edric. Ok now, religion is all based on faith and beliefs. When you add facts just to say your right about your religion, what does that make the religion? Science. Nowadays religion is often exercised as a theory with facts, beliefs, and a little bit of faith mixed together. And what Shaddam_Corrino said

"All religions have an unspoken commandment: Thou shalt not question!"

that is exactly what most people are not doing when arguing their religion. If they have faith, they wouldn't question their religion or have to argue about it. But if you take faith away and you have to argue about your religion being right, you questioned it right there in your mind. That's the way our minds work. And about the Paul being evil ordeal, if you compare yourself with a supposedly evil leader who killed millions, why would that make you evil? Paul didn't say what Genghis or Hitler did was acceptable or even right. He was merely comparing himself to them. And also with those prescience powers, that's bound to put some psychological problems in your head. Maybe the spice was controlling him, who knows? About what Ordos45 said, Evolution is NOT blind faith. If you say that is, then religion is definitely blind faith. Scientists, more specifically archaeologists/paleontologists, they have many facts to back up their theory. You can't just quote a tour guide and think that's whats right. He/She is not a scientist, so how would he/she know? And adaptation is enough proof to consider evolution exists, because many animals had to adapt to different environments, so their whole genetics were changed just to adapt to their surroundings, ergo they evolved. I am not an atheist, but my friend once told me that things such as Noah's flood could have very well have happened, but the people maybe greatly have exaggerated the flood just to tell certain lessons. And also so what if Lucy was a fake, people are like that. But DO NOT confuse them with the people who are honest about their findings and present REAL facts. And Edric I agree those excerpts may have been just metaphors but if they were, what else are metaphors? Anything you might believe to be, may have a different meaning, so who knows. Basically this thread will never end because none of us will convince the other, but I am just posting my views. :)

[ordos45]

The tour guide's answers are made by proffesors and are shown as facts in textbooks. As for religion being blind faith...it is. That is the definition of religion. But ask yourself how bacteria knows how to act and go where and do what?

Oh well its just my views that I'm posting...much like you are posting yours and you are right this thread will never end unless we all stop posting. Unfortunately my ego is still keeping me here partially. Much as all our egos are because no one wants to say they are wrong.

[garth]

Hitler killed millions of people with his soldiers. Paul killed billions of people with his legions:

"He didn't kill them himself, Stil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions."

Paul was directly involved in sending out his legions to kill. I don't see how this is very confusing folks......

[Edric O]

MoiDib, like I said, each part of the Bible has its own author. Just because one part contains lots of metaphores or whatever, that doesn't tell us anything about what the OTHER authors wrote. And I can't know what those versets mean unless I know the context. I'll go look. And yes, some parts of the Bible have more than one possible interpretation. That's why there are several Christian Churches, instead of one. But the core of the Bible can only be interpreted in one way. The Ten Comandments and Jesus' teachings are plain and clear.

Evolution is a faith. Why? Because by "Evolution" people don't just mean the actual process, but many other things that have no proof whatsoever. Like the fact that life appeared by itself or that the dinosaurs were killed by an asteroid.

Personally, I think evolution is completelly and absolutelly wrong. But evolution doesn't have to be wrong for Christianity to be right. Like I said, God might have created living beings through an accelerated evolution. I don't believe it, but it could be true. One way or the other, it doesn't really matter HOW God created the world.

[Acriku]

Yes Shaddam, but that doesn't mean he knew how to stop it. My guess is, is he found by his prescience that the Jihad was going to take place with or without him, so he decided to not kill himself or what-have-you and thought just maybe he could do something whilst being in power. Then after it took place, maybe he liked it, but who wouldn't like having such a huge impact on the universe, and having so much fricking power?! But, if their was no ounce of regret, guilt, etc, then he is surely evil. As for the religious thing, I'm just gonna stop and only hope that others will, too, but if they want to post their views, I can't stop them. :)

[Mahdi]

""He didn't kill them himself, Stil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions."

Paul was directly involved in sending out his legions to kill. I don't see how this is very confusing folks......"

How do you know he wasn't talking about when he sent his legions out to fight the Harkonnens Shaddam?

[garth]

I know he's not talking about the Harkonnens because that conversation between Stilgar and Paul is taken in the context of the Zabulon conquest, one of the many planetary victims of his Jihad.

"Sire, I came with the Zabulon computations," Stilgar said.

"Dehydrate the Zabulon computations!" Paul snapped, using the obscene Fremen term which meant that here was moisture no man could demean himself by touching.

"M'Lord!"

"Stilgar," Paul said, "you urgently need a sense of balance which can come only from an understanding of long-term effects."

(Then they go into the exchange about Ghenghis Khan)

~p.135 2 paragraphs above Paul's confession of direct involvement in the Jihad

[bob_fox]

Evolution has zip supporting it. Scientists invented it because they didn't like the sound of believing in God. I mean, according to evolutionary thinking, the primates between the "original" monkeys and humans were more adapted to their enviroment than the original monkeys (they say animals evolve to adapt more to their enviroment). Why, then, are there monkeys but none of the primates that came after them? Evolutionists say that evolution works on "the survival of the fittest" - aren't the primates that came after the monkeys supposed to be more "fit" than the orginal monkeys?

They say that they've found the primates between monkeys and humans in the ground. But lots of scientists say that they could be people with diseases or certain races of humans that died out. Carbon dating is inaccurate when dealing with huge amounts of time because both the Bible and scientists agree that the atmosphere was different, and this fact does effect carbon dating.

There is a lot more evidence against evolution, this is just an example.

BTW a "day" can mean any amount of time (eg. many people now say things like "this is how it was in Shakespeare's DAY".

[Mahdi]

""Ghenghis......Khan? Was he of the Sardaukar m'Lord?" (Stilgar)

"Oh, long before that. He killed.....perhaps four million." (Paul)

"He must've had formidable weaponry to kill that many, sire. Lasbeams, perhaps, or....." (Stilgar)

"He didn't kill them himself, Stil. He killed the way I kill, by sending out his legions.""

Ah, it may have begun about the jihad, but the conversation turned to Genghis Khan.

[Acriku]

"Statistics: at a conservative estimate, I've killed sixty-one billion, sterilized ninety planets, completely demoralized five hundred others. Ive wiped out the followers of forty religions which had existed since--"

"Unbelievers!" Korba protested. "Unbelievers all!"

"No," Paul said. "Believers."

"My liege makes a joke," Korba said, vioce trembling. "The Jihad has brought ten thousand worlds into the shining light of--"

"Into the darkness," Paul said. "We'll be a hundred generations recovering from Muad'Dib's Jihad. I find it hard to imagine that anyone will ever surpass this." A barking laugh erupted from his throat.

"What amuses Muad'Dib?" Stilgar asked.

"I am not amused. I merely had a sudden vision of the Emperor Hitler saying something similar. No doubt he did."

You see, Paul realizes what his Jihad did, and from what the book says, I can conclude he is not happy, he just likes the fact that he is the most powerful. Remember, he cares more for the equipment than his men.

Paul has no idea who or what or why Hitler killed. He thinks of "Emperor" Hitler as an Emperor who has used his legions for war, not also for eliminating the "Differents"(people who Hitler thought to be different, therefore not of his perfect race, therefore must die). He doesn't realize the evil behind Hitler/Genghis Khan/himself. The spice and power got to his head I would say.

[garth]

The conversation didn't turn to Ghenghis Khan, Paul was using him and Hitler as an example to help Stilgar (and Korba who's also in the room) understand the Jihad using historical context.

They are talking about the Jihad before, during, and after Ghenghis Khan, as MoiDib just posted.

It's clear Paul had his legions kill 61 billion people.

[Mahdi]

No Shaddam, it isn't clear. Paul says he kills people with his legions. That does not mean he is the one that ordered the Jihad. It means that when he has to kill someone, he sues his army.

[garth]

Mahdi you're ignoring the entire context of the conversation lol

[exatreide]

listin edric i think this is getting way way to ugly. i respect your veiws. ok? hopefully you reaspect my veiws.

[Digital Guerrilla]

Yeah it did ugly there for a minute but you guys handled it good. Hey I would not expect any less from you raving Dune Fanatics.:)LOL But to jump right in the conversation all the stuff about evolution some I believe could be true and other parts I feel we have yet to find the answers. Mankind is still looking for his place in the universe and his origin outside of religion. IMO both can go together science and religion there should not be a seperation but ther is in between the two. A religious person should not disbelieve science for God(if you believe was created by a higher entity) gave man the knowledge to explore his surroundings and understand them in order to master it. I only say this because some of the last posts have been centered around beliefs in God, evolution and religious subjects. The only reason we are sometimes separated by religion is because we fail to remember is that we all do not see things the same way and our beliefs are no different.

[Acriku]

Didn't God say something in some Bible that you don't see visible facts of his existence because if he showed us he was real, where would our faith go?

Main Entry: 1faith

Pronunciation: 'fAth

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE

Date: 13th century

Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th_]z/

1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions

2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust

3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

synonym see BELIEF

- in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY

At 2-b-1 definition it says firm belief in something for which there is no proof. If we had proof, faith would no longer exist.