娛樂滿紛 26FUN - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 究竟有冇神 [打印本頁]

作者: RyuII 時間: 2005-4-8 05:22 PM 標題: 究竟有冇神

頭先睇左篇 "精彩辯論-----信耶穌不合科學" 好想討論下有冇神, d  H& @9 \7 F  {% u$ F2 H; }
現在可以分到兩派, 信神同不信神而且各走極端: @  b, F( N2 I+ J. ^9 ^  i

首先我係不信神, 但我唔可以排除聖經上寫o既野係真的." N. K. V" N/ O$ B
假設聖經上寫o既係真的話, 地球就係出現過同我地唔同o既生物, 佢有我地冇o既能力.% J& \1 T; ~0 R; M9 G: _

但咁等唔等於一齊都係由佢創造呢? 如果係的話佢係由邊個創造呢?
3 p  B6 ]0 Z4 V: E+ g8 ]) h
所以我o既結論係地球可能曾經出現過比我地普通人更出眾o既人類或生物, 佢o既能力至今仍未能被科學解釋, 但我地亦唔可以斷言佢就係萬物o既創造者, 因為如果咁講就冇法解解佢係點黎.
8 i4 I  v1 e0 i
我相信只要信神o既人唔好太堅持佢係萬能
唔信神o既人亦唔好太堅持佢唔存在
咁會易溝通 d

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-8 05:30 PM

真神亞拉!

作者: DXneo 時間: 2005-4-8 05:37 PM

神這概念係由人創造出來的.
/ o3 z4 o2 J# U- W
"史提分,克建斯"(可能譯錯) 話所有都是發生於偶然的.& E' |5 V8 V2 ]( }2 v8 V+ R& h

這個題目不適合有信仰的人看,有些信仰從無話過佢地“那位”會能乜能物,
有些信仰又沒有“那位”的存在,有些信仰更有多位,, d e! a/ Z; x0 E6 b5 b
" M$ H# u4 L1 J# [
現在還強行把人分兩派,不太好. s g3 b# |+ J" m

[ Last edited by DXneo on 2005-4-8 at 05:40 PM ]

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-8 05:39 PM

神,在心中9 d3 C h4 B6 s( B, S2 z/ ]
' ?1 Y: B. o# t/ k; |4 v% Y4 z- b) v
你信就有,唔信咪無囉!

作者: rest365days 時間: 2005-4-8 05:40 PM

Originally posted by RyuII at 2005-4-8 05:22 PM:( p; _/ I# K. H
頭先睇左篇 "精彩辯論--- ...

, e1 Q( D- \& m1 G+ |
"所以我o既結論係地球可能曾經出現過比我地普通人更出眾o既人類或生物.." - - ->"佢係由邊個創造呢?"* ~2 V+ n) T3 Y, N6 D1 F

你嘅問題同樣挑戰番你嘅結論, 仲可以無限重複向後推添喎:cool:

作者: rest365days 時間: 2005-4-8 05:44 PM

Originally posted by DXneo at 2005-4-8 05:37 PM:1 Y! b! @; z# t8 R' p4 K: B
神這概念係由人創造出來的.9 c; G: t- S& ]/ ~8 h
6 ]0 q. }$ p5 {- i% ~, J' t8 J/ C6 z
&quo ...

5 x; I3 r- m3 O) h
( H) r! ^* E: z
雖然立場唔同, 但係好欣賞你對你自己嘅信仰好有passion, 衷心的

作者: RyuII 時間: 2005-4-8 05:47 PM

Originally posted by rest365days at 2005-4-8 05:40 PM:
# c; ~- v9 F5 j1 m! [6 j( L) `3 A: K' T7 m2 U1 {9 A* Z( I

4 G: V, }, ^9 P, g: X5 g"所以我o既結論係地球可能曾經出現過比我地普通人更出眾o既人類或生物.."
3 l$ r- V% z1 w1 e你嘅問題同樣挑戰番你嘅結論, 仲可以無限重複向後推添喎
0 u1 u4 Q3 n+ g! ]# x0 N

/ i0 H+ B/ Y/ \5 f" V; y2 M
$ \. x9 d* V: M- t# \. R
下, 聖經唔係話耶蘇係佢阿爸阿媽生架咩? 同我個結論有乜野關係呀?

作者: DXneo 時間: 2005-4-8 05:51 PM

Originally posted by rest365days at 2005-4-8 17:44:0 B# m3 c7 |" y0 ?) b* |, @- a
' E5 C9 x0 ?8 d# W' f# t, N& _
9 z$ G( T) [4 I3 \8 }
雖然立場唔同, 但係好欣賞你對你自己嘅信仰好有passion, 衷心的

! [+ H c9 x+ Q# y" j& k( L
謝謝,只是愚見...

作者: 火柴仔 時間: 2005-4-8 07:22 PM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-8 17:39:- Q0 ]# g$ J. K
神,在心中- K0 T# i! [- \* @1 M

8 H4 F& S8 `& K你信就有,唔信咪無囉!

5 Y( K6 O( G) q1 Z0 i2 @
我都覺............

作者: sfxc0000 時間: 2005-4-8 07:23 PM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-8 05:39 PM:2 K9 v) Y* L( R" A
神,在心中2 ~4 L5 {' D( x% ^. ?; M7 ]4 ]8 k
. |$ _7 g3 s0 [7 A' g% ]
你信就有,唔信咪無囉!

講得好~~
我都係咁認為~~~

作者: Gretzky 時間: 2005-4-9 12:44 AM

So the very existence of a person depends on whether others believe he/she exist or not?

Let's say someone (as reported in another post) actually saw Leslie Cheung in South America and claims the suicide was actually a hoax. Now some of us would believe this being true while others think this is nuts. But it's not up to us to decide whether he's dead or alive, right? If he's dead, he's dead. If he's alive, he's alive. Our opinion has nothing to do with that truth.

The question here is: Does one's belief (determined by his experience) decide whether someone exist or not?' a+ @% r2 x* x9 L: C
5 {5 z) g8 g9 H! I
My point here is: God can exist without us believing. A Supereme Being (whatever God/gods) DOES NOT NEED US to believe in order to prove his/her/their existence.
' B- D4 h3 N# q& b( f
I say this because the existential statement by Decarte "I believe, therefore I exist" is not a universal applicable statement (think about Terri Schivao, the brain-dead woman) and it has some fallacies. . ^& `% u2 }% s

(Pls note: its logic here I'm after, not religion at all.)

作者: MaxFigo 時間: 2005-4-9 12:51 AM

係咪真係有神咁重要咩 ??
信仰只係人類內心ge一種依靠6 x* x c! A+ @; G( d
何必要強行否定佢呢 ??

我無需信仰$ h0 `+ |) K1 S. D* b& _; ~; e
因為有冇神根本與我無關
亦唔係我能力範圍可以控制到
知道左亦對人類前途毫無幫助
咁又何必深究呢 ?? @@

作者: fishball 時間: 2005-4-9 01:34 AM

感性:0 c8 L, I/ A G5 }' m0 p" e! m
這世上有一位神
是主宰
如一切出於偶然
那是說人類只是一堆垃圾?! P ?+ Y: i w% X; }) K H& E
不只是人類，是所有生物都是一堆碳垃圾?!
那人的靈魂何在??+ t& T7 C( C6 C3 }. ^/ i/ }
9 g; }6 m+ q1 e% Q4 N5 J
理性:
我以世上第一個細胞為例, e4 R% _1 R, H! D
要在現今進化論堅持第一個細胞的出現方法" G& u8 ~+ q; S8 m* ]" p
要造到這個條件的機率是10x10^-4505 H( l& E) V' b& t4 r+ z
以地球的體積，發生這個事件是不可能!!; z& B3 }. U6 @/ b8 {
那第進化出一個人的機率更是極極極低. E3 H! l7 g3 ~7 t) [) G
而一個不信神的科學家"賀耶爵士"在一九八一年八月十四日的倫敦"每日快信報"
有一篇"必有一位神"的文章，在當中作了一個比喻：
相信生命是偶然誕生就好像相信龍捲風橫掃垃圾場後自動裝出一架747客機% V# j1 X7 e& b: }2 Q3 H2 k
..............................................
那生命就更不可能是機率的產物!!
0 M) c) u5 ?6 r; x2 ?! \6 |3 R
以上仍個人意見

作者: brightlee 時間: 2005-4-9 01:39 AM

I believe GOD is in here, and looking around us now

作者: hiroraymond 時間: 2005-4-9 03:27 AM

其實 DXneo 引用左好多作者既意見，
相信你睇過好多書，
但我諗你唔會淨係睇否定神存在既書呀嘛？

作者: RyuII 時間: 2005-4-9 11:31 AM

咁請問有冇人相信神可能係高智慧生物, 直接 d 講可能係外星人?4 d- [) A& p9 u# R
1 q. W4 n2 l7 X9 N" L0 e- Q0 _' \
有個大膽假設, 當人類科技發展到某個領域, 我地可以去到幾憶光年o既星球, 當我地發覺呢個星球可以適合某種生命體o既時候我地就可以設計一個簡單o既生命體, 我地唔需要去決定佢o既形狀大小等, 我地只需要設定佢可以o係唔同o既環境下去適應同改變.
咁當呢個星球再過幾百萬年後就會可能有等同我地現時智慧o既生物出現而且討論有冇神......

作者: MaxFigo 時間: 2005-4-9 02:39 PM

Originally posted by RyuII at 2005-4-9 11:31 AM:# m8 N$ Y& B, v0 ]/ m: ?+ S
咁請問有冇人相信神可能係高智慧生物, ...

7 d" E" J- z: H& a4 M" q# _6 @

/ n7 s: |/ o6 a; j- \4 b7 H& L
我最buy e種說法
: u; U% b; _7 f f' x
就好似你去到土人部落用心外壓救返醒一個就死ge人0 `# x3 e* q# E- V8 L1 O5 p' r1 m
d土人都會當你行緊神蹟 @@

作者: austin666 時間: 2005-4-9 03:28 PM

呢個問題好簡單
& v" y' O' o) i+ Y+ c/ U$ @
法輪功果條友話自己係佛
你信吳信丫
耶穌以前都係咁同人講自己係神2 T! O, a- q) \; |; j
如果我同你講我係神你又信吳信丫
: T6 h: p2 m1 M) N6 M. M
耶穌死後再復活
係呢個世界上都有吳少的人死後再復活
有人更返老還童後生左幾十年
咁呢d人係咪又係神呢
0 A8 ^& y. S0 J
聖經所說的道理即使沒聖經
大家一樣明白裡面的道理/ C5 v+ G) t# A8 h7 u6 g! Y& q
(其他好似佛教,伊斯蘭教......都一樣)

作者: DXneo 時間: 2005-4-9 03:32 PM

Originally posted by hiroraymond at 2005-4-9 03:27:
$ n- J5 @) d6 K+ e: v其實 DXneo 引用左好多作者既意見，
# p7 N/ P- l5 a% z; z相信你睇過好多書，" o e. X/ t4 Z# {) Z% O
但我諗你唔會淨係睇否定神存在既書呀嘛？

2 w: M8 O5 G( V9 Q% W; h$ N
都算是睇過幾多唔同類既書

作者: austin666 時間: 2005-4-9 03:33 PM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-8 05:39 PM:
! ]$ q: J8 r" @1 T+ B/ P神,在心中
; {# M7 ~5 x9 h+ Q
6 N( b4 B. s, j你信就有,唔信咪無囉!

- C6 U+ f! x1 G8 H7 S1 E

如果神在心中2 j: C" a9 q2 f' @$ c

咁吳信都系係心中啦

咁又何來 "唔信咪無囉!"; B) U4 t& u1 s3 h
8 _* M3 { l& N L
前後矛盾=.="

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-9 04:01 PM

Originally posted by austin666 at 2005-4-9 03:33 PM:# q! P! q1 X8 }! i$ N
6 {  l  }# P" f- F
' i6 G5 @: e5 |$ F4 k) K: [
如果神在心中
/ T' n. L- n2 h3 h- I
: a9 o8 O+ l/ A  z9 J咁吳信都系係心中啦* r3 }7 N8 E2 j2 z. X7 U' o

) B4 u0 n' j" y( j& \( J  X: \咁又何來 "唔信咪無囉!"
$ n  `* F0 E8 ^$ b; w5 B; P, S% h6 ?: ]$ x7 o
前後矛盾=.="

) }% M I8 y- M- {& M

即係,神,只係存在係心中(自己創造出黎!)俾自己祟拜!9 v8 {# R, z- Z, g# `4 I
K: o5 M0 N5 n% z/ G
你唔信,咪無囉!

作者: tung kin wah 時間: 2005-4-9 04:06 PM 標題: An indea of 'Silicon Life'

To fishball and other brothers beliving in god, ; z- [' |/ w. z+ l* `  \  p

First of all I agree with Gretzky's statement that "A Supereme Being (whatever God/gods) DOES NOT NEED US to believe in order to prove his/her/their existence." therefore I can't disprove its existence.2 |) ^0 n# \  I) j, a

However, if he doesn't help with our further understanding of ourselves, (or even inhibiting ourselves from finding the truth) you have to choose your way : understand more but also further understanding our inaduacy, or STOP EVERYTHING  and feeling satisified with believal on the god ? I choose the way of science so I've just borrowed 3 statistics books from library learning how to have induction from the collected data.

About your statement : "要造到這個條件的機率是10x10^-450" , I study Physics as my first degree, I've confident on understanding every scientific statement, they all have some ASSUMPTIONS. I never heard of that before, would you please let me know where did you get this statement ? I would like to look at the underlying assuptions before I belive on it

0 Y4 @7 H/ q5 s L7 I9 i- F
I recently read some books on 'silicon life'. Some researchers using the computers to simulate the possibility of evolution. Do you know the result ? They give some basic circuit elements ( just like amino acid ) , some selection criteria like having all high freq. signal pass and weaken all low freq.signals ( like those defined by our environment ) , and let the computer invent anything by random and competiton.... The result is that, ONLY 1xx STEPS ( i.e. 1xx offsprings), the computer INVENTED the perfect high pass filter we designed. Without our help, the nature can always find its path ! " d/ }& f; T7 [' D6 Z g
. P) p: U8 y$ D1 p
If one day we put the solar panel (葉綠素) , logic gate (安基酸)...etc together and let them evolve by themselves, then the silicon life may be created. Believing in nature, we got to compete with them and we may not win in that case. We are the creation, but do you think we are the god ?

冥冥中自有主載, 人是很渺小的....

作者: austin666 時間: 2005-4-9 04:07 PM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 2005-4-9 04:01 PM:5 ?% T- X6 h; {; y; i0 W0 t
4 a7 W6 _; G! J7 j

9 S5 \2 j; ?: P: N即係,神,只係存在係心中(自己創造出黎!)俾自己祟拜!. L5 H5 f. O. p, M

) \/ f! b8 f5 Q' n7 w你唔信,咪無囉!

$ A8 ]* S: [% P |& Z3 [/ O

. p$ [" _- Y8 o- L1 |3 ]% K) v
(自己創造出黎!)俾自己祟拜!
7 e& x4 S% T/ Q5 D) \* `, I
果D好似叫 "神經病"............; ]5 V9 i C2 y9 _5 P6 {
' |! J0 c( v/ D4 A% T4 l3 O3 S
神點可能由人創造出黎

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-9 04:16 PM

Originally posted by fishball at 2005-4-9 01:34 AM:
/ `8 s! J; r2 }- o1 }# n3 G! y感性:1 s# q" z) m- a1 W4 z
這世上有一位神
5 b5 d8 A" Z* @& i( U是主宰9 z+ x1 l1 y( f$ }- ^' x
如一切出於偶然
, b- P4 h8 x1 C那是說人類只是一堆垃圾?!( R6 G/ ^2 C8 h' i9 _5 ~
不只是人類，是所有生物都是一堆碳垃圾?!! `( }8 ~9 p1 x( ^; i
那人的靈魂何在??
2 Q; r+ r S4 m# C3 K4 n$ Z" J6 ^. z2 N4 D7 o
理性:$ O; d2 S3 R. r
我以世上第一個細胞為例
2 w. ?* g G& j: n" q0 D& u7 b8 F要在現今進化論堅持第一個細胞的出現方法
! x% ^8 l0 T' `7 r7 h要造到這個條件的機率是10x10^-450
# @! F5 Y, |7 l' a+ R1 R, h以地球的體積，發生這個事件是不可能!!& g# D+ T0 [& K9 S- A8 M8 j
那第進化出一個人的機率更是極極極低- ^8 S1 ~# s; W3 k1 l
而一個不信神的科學家"賀耶爵士"在一九八一年八月十四日的倫敦"每日快信報"
5 ^: w( M0 M' U& p6 A" n0 y0 u有一篇"必有一位神"的文章，在當中作了一個比喻：* ^6 n& R1 R4 d" R3 g
相信生命是偶然誕生就好像相信龍捲風橫掃垃圾場後自動裝出一架747客機
# D3 ~$ v& E# n- S+ S

點解不可能?1萬億分1既機會唔等於唔可能!: S0 G* N/ p' h1 r* k
. \+ g; t& m5 J! U- o7 X
當然要人去估生命點樣係幾百億地球出現,係好困難,亦無從証明.
( x: Z* x% ]% o* }9 N) r0 A3 P
不過如果話所以野都係神製造出黎...我相信機會真係等於0!

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-9 04:19 PM

Originally posted by austin666 at 2005-4-9 04:07 PM:' P5 k9 H5 w* n
+ p0 N6 i( y( z1 t+ u

3 b& a% M. }* O% ^8 @9 X* e& Y- q7 L6 A; Q1 ~
(自己創造出黎!)俾自己祟拜!
1 ]0 ^% ^1 ?$ z2 R) u% ^/ R& o& G
果D好似叫 "神經病"............
' {7 Q* @3 t7 m4 J) U* ]$ ]
# m" Q4 T! [. a神點可能由人創造出黎

) T" s7 i) K- w, Y

因為根本就無神!0 z* ?# l& V( ^9 E* H

如果話有,都只係存在係你既腦入面,實際根本唔存在係世上!

作者: ilovefuckingyou 時間: 2005-4-9 04:22 PM

Originally posted by austin666 at 2005-4-9 04:07 PM:
! |/ @+ A  c$ m& W$ \* c" ^) N& Q7 K4 [0 q9 ~

9 V5 @2 H/ R/ h, q
9 T  X9 Q( f) @- z9 G7 H  J(自己創造出黎!)俾自己祟拜!
, F7 w; `+ A% C* D- B# S& }0 b  y; @: R6 x2 i
果D好似叫 "神經病"............6 c0 S: K$ e6 \4 I+ N
  [1 h( c1 ?5 m5 q
神點可能由人創造出黎

其實你講得o岩! 每1個宗教都係甘樣由人創造出黎!

作者: 大家樂1234 時間: 2005-4-9 06:19 PM

我信佛多d

作者: RyuII 時間: 2005-4-9 07:43 PM

但點解冇人信神係高智慧生物(外星人)?

作者: inpennhouse 時間: 2005-4-9 07:54 PM

唔信你睇下教宗都死左la 死之前重要咁辛苦又唔見jesus去打救佢

作者: cyhk 時間: 2005-4-9 08:33 PM

好似係度傾有冇神唔係幾好, 個人信仰問題, 好難有結論,& C, p& d; y7 }2 `
所以呢個話題, 我從來唔強人接收我的睇法, 但又唔鍾意別人強我接受佢的睇法,( ^: \! ~6 O: u6 h1 \
. s0 V- D  D5 X: C% \. ?
對宗教信仰爭辯結果, 可能是宗教衝突, 甚至宗教戰爭,
總之都係個句, 河水不犯井水, 各自修行, 互相尊重, 咁就天下太平  p; y5 @" W  H
/ O, q/ m& }. q% @4 n/ x( w4 w  }% m
[ Last edited by cyhk on 2005-4-9 at 08:38 PM ]

作者: robertchai 時間: 2005-4-10 05:47 AM

我只係知道林志玲係我既神

作者: crap 時間: 2005-4-10 06:02 AM

Originally posted by inpennhouse at 2005-4-9 09:54 PM:) v7 p% u& O. j8 Y" Z4 F! t
唔信你睇下教宗都死左la 死之前重要咁辛苦又唔見jesus去打救佢

+ j4 D+ c0 N- L. x2 u; B
$ Y1 m A) ]: v
生老病死係人必經, 中西方既宗教都係主長永生, 人生只係一小部份) E4 T6 Y J) [. M2 l) ~' D8 Z9 s0 r
佢地都只係想導人向善, 活得有意義
大道理我唔識, 但任何宗教都唔應該用黎信口開河/開玩笑
希望大家明白, 成熟d同專重別人既信仰

[ Last edited by crap on 2005-4-10 at 08:04 AM ]

作者: brightlee 時間: 2005-4-10 08:21 AM

Originally posted by inpennhouse at 2005-4-9 21:54:* N0 @$ E0 S1 x' E- }- r' W+ K
唔信你睇下教宗都死左la 死之前重要咁辛苦又唔見jesus去打救佢

4 c( O1 H; Z. J& L8 ]

I don't want to say in rude way...- ], I- A1 ?" n5 z6 v

but in reality, how could u know?!

作者: anttiniemi2000 時間: 2005-4-10 11:22 AM

god is only for some people who don't believe themselves to believe.

作者: neptune1122 時間: 2005-4-10 01:35 PM

Originally posted by ilove---you at 09:39 AM 09:39 AM:1 D: I" C5 k2 q

# {) w; Z% n$ g. E. N+ ^- z
% Q0 F$ c7 T) J- A- `3 T你信就有,唔信咪無囉!

* L8 r% T( \8 `" p. e# x1 x1 t$ |
i also wan say this but give you say first....so think wat u think.....if u think have so have,if no so no la......

作者: brightlee 時間: 2005-4-10 01:44 PM

Originally posted by neptune1122 at 2005-4-10 15:35:$ d. X7 b& F5 _) a9 \

4 U4 U: N+ X$ {- c9 Di also wan say this but give you say first....so think wat u think.....if u think have so have,if no so no la......

: l1 W S/ T" _8 m0 t
& a- ]' D$ Z* g7 ^ V. j+ l' I- _
yes, your setences is much better and in polite right!!
2 F7 g7 k) I, o& E
^^5 a6 o9 N/ ~( B5 p* g, L
last one is really immature and in rude

作者: neptune1122 時間: 2005-4-10 02:06 PM

Originally posted by brightlee at 05:44 AM 05:44 AM:
7 Q( X( b m. C/ Z; k* O) D4 j% s9 e4 z8 V8 W9 `- I" T+ w
! l; A% U! ^9 H7 `' R) I' B% L$ B
yes, your setences is much better and in polite right!!
; S' Y% L8 ]& w# d* i
+ p6 z$ Z- C) u7 c) S" c^^8 ^* i5 |1 K* `' e+ N1 e ~
last one is really immature and in rude

8 j% M2 B& t- x+ } i( P
thanks bright.......

作者: crap 時間: 2005-4-10 02:41 PM

Originally posted by anttiniemi2000 at 2005-4-10 01:22 PM:
3 J/ S. I& I2 x' Tgod is only for some people who don't believe themselves to believe.

- i# ~* c' L' @/ J
# o4 h, o; _; k q2 C6 k6 ?- y$ s

People pray to God for world peace, people who don't believe in God is part of the world

作者: brightlee 時間: 2005-4-10 04:19 PM

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-10 16:41:
) b ^' U0 B% }& i- c! h
4 x1 n3 R0 {! _" T1 I* K9 ]- Z' _" h" y# a+ M/ \
) m* y$ b5 w5 s) D
People pray to God for world peace, people who don't believe in God is part of the world

good quote.

作者: tung kin wah 時間: 2005-4-10 11:56 PM

Yes, it is the basically the number one rule of my believal in nature.- O& L9 z% [1 _# M$ Y; J7 ^( v
1 y3 ^, p- M. ]; ]3 K. H3 H% X
Nature will always find its path, even without humans' involvement.
The ways nature evoving is by 'free will'. So basically I agree that someone may believe in god, someone may believe in Budda, someone may believe in A La, ....even a electron has its freedom to appear in any location from our confined knowledge on quantum mechanics.  Everyone must got the freedom to choose his way lah ! 7 P( @/ B% M) n! P$ q
  |1 c% f* |2 z7 @- {- H( e5 m  w
It is my consolidation from my knowledge in science and history: freedom => changes => competition => efficient selection =>  progress => strength to survive. Applicable nearly to all aspect. . s4 ?2 O7 E" Z. @
" c( E+ N" L$ D. i
Ha Ha, but I've more believe as the utimate development goal of the Universe is unknown, but the ultimate development goal of human being should be 真善美。
! K! D4 V3 m, p' a
唔係 FA LUN GUNG 講既真善忍喎。
: k& B3 I! D# o8 |
請對宇宙給我們在思想上的自由常存感恩。 : i1 F4 @4 ~/ O* [5 g# x( y
不同的人類常嘗試以不同名義剝奪宇宙給我們的自由。

作者: tung kin wah 時間: 2005-4-10 11:58 PM

Yes, it is the basically the number one rule of my believal in nature.
* P/ g* O# D9 g$ d
Nature will always find its path, even without humans' involvement.8 V' b( h7 V& [, Q% a
The ways nature evoving is by 'free will'. So basically I agree that someone may believe in god, someone may believe in Budda, someone may believe in A La, ....even a electron has its freedom to appear in any location from our confined knowledge on quantum mechanics.  Everyone must got the freedom to choose his way lah ! 8 _- H, G) V8 T- \- c1 S2 t5 k
8 c1 o4 `1 z6 U- }
It is my consolidation from my knowledge in science and history: freedom => changes => competition => efficient selection =>  progress => strength to survive. Applicable nearly to all aspect.
5 M5 e) q' B4 _7 d* i" J0 W3 h
Ha Ha, but I've more believe as the utimate development goal of the Universe is unknown, but the ultimate development goal of human being should be 真善美。! x1 p: ]* L, x: @- Q- ?) P
- k5 X+ j( s: E1 c, \& m7 o* H
唔係 FA LUN GUNG 講既真善忍喎。8 n! g/ ?7 K- v* Z  E
& W, C) x& x+ R: d1 [2 j: p
請對宇宙給我們在思想上的自由常存感恩。
不同的人類常嘗試以不同名義剝奪宇宙給我們的自由。

歡迎光臨娛樂滿紛 26FUN (http://www.26fun.com/bbs7/)