Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity



Who knows the truth about God? Nobody. I do not know, for sure, how all these around us came into being. Where is the beginning and where is the end? Who knows the answers? There is no conclusion to this conversation. Therefore, differing views on this subject are expected. I go with my own views on this subject; in that - God dwells in our conceptual world. If someone can live without that concept - it should be fine. 


When I say - God's duty ended after the creation, I mean - the first living-beings were created somehow. I do not know what was that somehow. Whatever it was - the process was self-consistent. Every living-being depends on others for survival. It's hard to fathom how a self-sustaining process could occur without a preplan or design. Once this process started - it kept on going on autopilot. 


Jiten

--- On Tue, 1/8/13, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2013, 7:59 PM

 

"I think - God's job is done after the creation."---Religion began in ancient Egypt as a brainchild of Menes, the priest-king, and propagated through Greece.  Nowhere God had the role of a creator of anything.  In Greek mythology, the Universe was created by a demiurge, Yaldabaoth, having the head of a lion and tail of a snake.  He is a demon and was conceived by the Goddess of Wisdom as she went to explore the nature of supreme unknowable God, Amun.

Failing to answer what God did before he created the Universe, some priests said he was busy creating hell for the non-believers, while others believed he was busy arranging marriages of the souls he would send to earth and other habitable planets.  Being not so sure about the divine efficacy, they imposed celibacy on a large sect of priests.

According to the erudite, Richard Dawkins, God is nothing more than a delusion.  Even a worthless greenback is more powerful than him.


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Islam says, everything is under God's control. God gave us certain freedom in( known as free will to western theologians) this world and we may use that to do good and may abuse the "Freedom" to commit crimes.

Mr. Rahman,

Your first and the second statements are contradictory. If everything is under God's control, as per Islam, you cannot have certain freedom. 

I think - God's job is done after the creation. Everything after that is as per our own will. If everything we do was under God's control, no one could do anything wrong. 

Jiten Roy

 

--- On
Tue, 1/8/13, QR <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:

From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2013, 6:40 AM


 

In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?


>>>>>>>>>>>>> Islam says, everything is under God's control. God gave us certain freedom in( known as free will to western theologians) this world and we may use that to do good and may abuse the "Freedom" to commit crimes.

The misunderstood popular Bangladeshi belief about concept of God created many misunderstanding about religion in general. For example a thief does not take Allah's permission to steal. Every person was empowered by our Maker to make positive and negative contributions and we cannot blame God for bad actors. In every religious instructions, God told us to be righteous and make positive contribution to humanity.

On a different note, we cannot even conceive power of our Creator. God has control over everything but allow freedom to many of us to make choices. For example according to Islam, Allah (SWT) is all hearing. Which means He can listen to you and billion others at the same time. It is NOT difficult for Creator of the Worlds (Rabbul Aalameen).

Therefore, you are a little off about concept of God as per Islam but I do understand where you are coming from. :-)

Shalom!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 5:00 pm
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity

 
In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?
 
Anyway, Newton was a believer, but knew how to separate religion and science, not like many blind-believers of this forum, who are not learning anything also, unfortunately. May God show them 7 shades of light!

Jiten Roy


--- On Sun, 1/6/13, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 4:32 PM

 
         Yes. It is true that Sir Isaac Newton was obsessed by the problem of the corruption of the text of certain sections of Scripture and seriously questioned the concept of Christ's divinity.  It was too big a controversy to enter into, and John Locke was wise to keep quiet about it. Newton had no problem getting his brilliant mathematics published, but these theological quarrels were a different matter altogether.  Newton had the good sense to keep the two separate.

           These mukto-mona wallahs never learn any thing. They will repeat their own pet platitudes again and again.  Science was born out of religion, as any history of science, Oriental or Occidental, will reveal.



To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; jnrsr53@yahoo.com
From: fareed.siddique123@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 23:39:45 +0300
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity

 

Hello Chakraborty
 
Unfortunately I have to reject your "Big NO" and that is YES. Sir Issac Newton was influenced by the then thoelogy of Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) please read
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850. Please read some of the excerpts below for your ready references.
Br
Fareed
The lie of 1 John 5-7 Per Sir Isaac Newton
 
The following section was sent to me by brother Shahid; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.
 
Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible
 
In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."
 

Newton on I John 5:7

 
Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."
 
Newton on I Timothy 3:16
 
In all the times of the hot and lasting Arian controversy it never came into play . . . they that read "God manifested in the flesh" think it one of the most obvious and pertinent texts for the business. "The word Deity imports exercise of dominion over subordinate beings and the word God most frequently signifies Lord. Every lord is not God. The exercise of dominion in a spiritual being constitutes a God. If that dominion be real that being is the real God; if it be fictitious, a false God; if it be supreme, a supreme God."  Newton also wrote a discussion on two other texts that Athanasius had attempted to corrupt. This work has not been preserved. He believed that not all the books of the Scriptures have the same authority.  
 
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850.
 

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Thanks for asking me this question. My answer is a big NO. That's I have said that Newton's interpretation was unfortunate. For a brief period of despair Rabindranath experimented with planchette. Even at the age of 36, Jagadish Bose heard the clear voice of the river Bhagirathi telling him that she came from the "jataa" of Mahadev, and so on.
I feel good that as a physicist you have not yet found any thing thing wrong in what I have written below. Please feel free. I want to learn. I have made the same request to Prof. Das. 

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2013 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
 
Do you think idea of "7th-Haven" came from seven heavenly lights? Just a thought!

--- On Sun, 1/6/13, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 11:09 AM

 
You are in the appropriate trade, so you will know better. Let me know if I am wrong. The visible portion of the electromagnetic radiation lying between infrared and ultraviolet radiation is a continuum and hence theoretically should have infinite colors, not only six or seven. So identification of I (Indigo) and B (Blue) in the well known VIBGYOR may not be artificial as we expect many more colors in this range not identifiable by our naked eyes. I am curious. 
By the by, I googled and found that telescope was not invented by Galileo. But it seems to be accepted by all that Newton built the first practical reflecting telescope. Telescopes are used to study planets. They are also used in labs along with the spectrometer. You can probably tell if Newton used telescope for this purpose. I thought he did. A prism disperses white light---knowledge of sixth-seventh grade science is enough to know this. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Now let me come to the main point. Was Newton ever influenced by theological beliefs in his scientific research? You have said, yes. I do not challenge that. It can happen. That is unfortunate. But if we look at his overall achievement, we see that experimentation and empirical observations were the basis of his formulations. It is the combination of sweat, systematic thought process, and genius that can lead to revolutionary discoveries and inventions.    
On Jan 5, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
I initiated it by saying that, being influenced by his faith, Newton saw seven colors in the spectrum in place of six, and the scientific community stuck to it.  I cited the example to show how faith influences science to a remarkable extent.

Reflecting telescope is irrelevant as a prism was used to disperse the components of sunlight.  You really have an appreciable ability to mix up things.
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
My statement was: Newton built the first reflecting telescope. The statement is still valid. 
I will still stick to my conclusion. Creative geniuses like Kalidas, 
Newton, Ramanujan, and Jagadish Bose were believers, but their achievements had nothing to do with gods or goddesses.  Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 7:41 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
You did it again, a reflection does not disperse sunlight into its components; refraction through a prism does.
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Newton built the first reflecting telescope. That should have been the sentence. Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 3, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
As usual you are wrong.  Telescope was invented by Galileo, and not Newton.  He decomposed sunlight by passing a beam of it through a prism, and not through a telescope.  Read basic physics again before you write something on it, Mr. Chakrabarty.

For Kalidas, about whose life little is known, it is very likely that his wife, Vidyadharee, came looking for him after she kicked him out of her bed.  He was found sitting on a stone besides the river Ksipra and contemplating suicide,  He misidentified her as the Goddess of learning, which in his days was named Kali/Saraswati.  In the mean time, one shock had opened his poetic nerve in the brain.  However, in the middle of a dark night, only her breasts were visible by the light emitted from her necklace, and he composed, "..Kuchajuga shovita muktahare"
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:23 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Jagadish
 Bose wrote an article in 1894 blending science with mythology. In his childhood he asked the Ganges, "River, where are you coming from?" He heard the voice of the Ganges, "From the jataa (interwoven hair) of Mahadev." At the age of 36, he asked the same question and he still heard the same distinct voice of the river Ganges, "Mahadever jataa hoite." There is no reason to believe that his scientific mind really heard the voice. Kalidas believed that it was the goddess Saraswati who made him write all the beautiful verses. The other day we read an article on the Indian mathematician Ramanujan who believed that all the theorems were revealed to him in dream from a god or goddess. Newton was a religious man. But his scientific works were not based on any faith. This is true for Jagadish Bose, Ramanujan, and all other scientists and mathematicians and even this is true for all the prophets or sages to whom knowledge was revealed. All the creations by humans were the result of sweat shed by them. There was nothing divine about them. Newton had to invent a telescope, for example, to study the nature of light.     
On Jan 1, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
One example of how faith influences science is the spectrum of sunlight as described by Sir Isaac Newton.  Nobody with common sense would find a difference between Blue and Indigo, but Newton did.  I suppose, he was deeply influenced by his heretic faith of Christian faith called Arian heresy.  He believed in the existence of seven heavens in which seven archangels sang religious songs, and probably as the light emitted by them reached the surface of earth, it became white(or colorless).  Religion is primitive science based mainly on cosmology and herbal therapy.  Mesopotamian civilization, in spite of being an advanced one compared to that of the Egyptians, did not need an afterlife and God(s) who would behave like a tyrant king, but the Egyptians needed such a creation of the priest king named Menes.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I believe you misread my comments. What I said is - how scientific assumptions can cross over to faith. Let me give you an example, some scientists believe in the man-made global warming theory, and when data did not support their belief, they manipulated data to stick to their belief. That's how science crosses over to faith.

Now, what is eternity? It's a big unknown, isn't it? Anytime you face an unknown, you are apprehensive about it, that's what I call a fear of the unknown. As you board a plane, you are apprehensive about what's lying ahead. This is a natural psychological response. Eternity is one such unknown. It is quite natural to wonder about the eternity. As we approach it - we get apprehensive about it. It's a fact. Isn't it? What's unscientific about the fear of eternity? I don't get it. Why are you thinking about punishment or reward? I am not talking about it?  I am talking about psychological response to the eternity, which is natural, if not scientific. Isn't it?

I think - you are trying to establish something that you already believe in, which I call faith-based discussion. Under this situation, you will not conceive alternative argument.

Jiten Roy
--- On Mon, 12/31/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, December 31, 2012, 7:54 AM
 
It may not be proper to use faith in the context of science. Science uses assumption, axiom, postulate, and hypothesis. But all of these are not wild guesses or imaginations. It is true that no formal proofs are offered, but they can be obvious and theories bases on these can have prediction capabilities. It follows the so called scientific method. 
Eternity of human life can be a philosophical proposition not a scientific one. So if you say that you have fear of eternity, then you are saying this on the basis of faith. Fear, right path, etc. cannot be scientific constructs, they can well fit into a religion--Godless or without God. Right path is a relative term and can be an important topic in ethics and moral philosophy. 
You have decided on your right path and as a matter of fact we all do. These are obviously important for an individual and the society he belongs to, but this is beyond the jurisdiction of science. 
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 30, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Assumption becomes faith when it is considered as truth, without any evidence. Scientists often assume (hypothesize) something, then investigate about its validity or truth. If they fail to validate, and yet believe in it, that becomes a faith.
 
There is another kind of assumption, in which a model is assumed which helps explain some unknown phenomena. If someone thinks that the model is the truth, and asks others to accept it - it becomes his faith. God and eternity are such phenomenological models to explain some unknowns. A scientist can assume these concepts if they help him understand those unknowns. Models can be physical structures or mathematical expressions. Therefore, if models have physical structures, they can be understood in a physical sense, as the concept of Gods and Goddesses in idols.
 
Fear of eternity/unknown is always with us. Such fears keep us in line. Some people can easily overcome fear of eternity or unknown, and can do certain things that most others can't imagine.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sun, 12/30/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, December 30, 2012, 9:13 AM

 
Fear of Unknown eternity? My humble question: Can a scientist believe in eternity in the physical sense? What is this fear about? Is it about any punishment that you may have to face? If this is so, then what are the remedies? Good works? Don't all these boil down to a concept of faith?  Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 28, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I don't know if my belief in God is circumstantial or what; it could be due to the fear of unknown eternity also. But, one thing I know for sure – I have no fear of God, if you are asking about that. I try to do everything right; that's all. Some people believe in almighty God, yet always claim to be victims of aggression from others. 
 
Anyway, I don't dwell on the existence of God or its form







__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Re: Rejoinder



Dalai Lama is great man with far superior human quality than many of the neanderthals, who happen to rule certain countries with no public mandate. The man has been fighting for his people as our leaders had fought for our freedom. His day will come someday!

Bangladesh is a sovereign country with 160 million people. It's representatives can meet whoever they want and it does not need to apologize to any scoundrel. Please do not underestimate the power of democracy even it is not perfect! Thank you.
-SD

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:02 PM, modasser khosseine <bolonhome@hotmail.com> wrote:
 
"Bangladesh Permanent Representative (PR) to the UN did not have any bilateral meeting with Dalai Lama as such". The story is simply fabricated.  Fact of the matter is; while a group of 21 Permanent Representatives to the UN were visiting Australia as guests of the Australian government to attend a Peacekeeping/Peacebuilding event, Dalai Lama who was also visiting Australia at the time, suddenly came across the group on the hallway and shacked hands with the UN-PRs including Bangladesh PR". 
Thank you,
Sincerely,
 
Press Wing
Permanent Mission of Bangladesh to the UN

 




--
"All great truths begin as blasphemies." GBS

__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity



"I think - God's job is done after the creation."---Religion began in ancient Egypt as a brainchild of Menes, the priest-king, and propagated through Greece.  Nowhere God had the role of a creator of anything.  In Greek mythology, the Universe was created by a demiurge, Yaldabaoth, having the head of a lion and tail of a snake.  He is a demon and was conceived by the Goddess of Wisdom as she went to explore the nature of supreme unknowable God, Amun.

Failing to answer what God did before he created the Universe, some priests said he was busy creating hell for the non-believers, while others believed he was busy arranging marriages of the souls he would send to earth and other habitable planets.  Being not so sure about the divine efficacy, they imposed celibacy on a large sect of priests.

According to the erudite, Richard Dawkins, God is nothing more than a delusion.  Even a worthless greenback is more powerful than him.


On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Islam says, everything is under God's control. God gave us certain freedom in( known as free will to western theologians) this world and we may use that to do good and may abuse the "Freedom" to commit crimes.

Mr. Rahman,

Your first and the second statements are contradictory. If everything is under God's control, as per Islam, you cannot have certain freedom. 

I think - God's job is done after the creation. Everything after that is as per our own will. If everything we do was under God's control, no one could do anything wrong. 

Jiten Roy

 

--- On
Tue, 1/8/13, QR <qrahman@netscape.net> wrote:

From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2013, 6:40 AM


 

In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?


>>>>>>>>>>>>> Islam says, everything is under God's control. God gave us certain freedom in( known as free will to western theologians) this world and we may use that to do good and may abuse the "Freedom" to commit crimes.

The misunderstood popular Bangladeshi belief about concept of God created many misunderstanding about religion in general. For example a thief does not take Allah's permission to steal. Every person was empowered by our Maker to make positive and negative contributions and we cannot blame God for bad actors. In every religious instructions, God told us to be righteous and make positive contribution to humanity.

On a different note, we cannot even conceive power of our Creator. God has control over everything but allow freedom to many of us to make choices. For example according to Islam, Allah (SWT) is all hearing. Which means He can listen to you and billion others at the same time. It is NOT difficult for Creator of the Worlds (Rabbul Aalameen).

Therefore, you are a little off about concept of God as per Islam but I do understand where you are coming from. :-)

Shalom!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 5:00 pm
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity

 
In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?
 
Anyway, Newton was a believer, but knew how to separate religion and science, not like many blind-believers of this forum, who are not learning anything also, unfortunately. May God show them 7 shades of light!

Jiten Roy


--- On Sun, 1/6/13, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 4:32 PM

 
         Yes. It is true that Sir Isaac Newton was obsessed by the problem of the corruption of the text of certain sections of Scripture and seriously questioned the concept of Christ's divinity.  It was too big a controversy to enter into, and John Locke was wise to keep quiet about it. Newton had no problem getting his brilliant mathematics published, but these theological quarrels were a different matter altogether.  Newton had the good sense to keep the two separate.

           These mukto-mona wallahs never learn any thing. They will repeat their own pet platitudes again and again.  Science was born out of religion, as any history of science, Oriental or Occidental, will reveal.



To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; jnrsr53@yahoo.com
From: fareed.siddique123@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 23:39:45 +0300
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity

 

Hello Chakraborty
 
Unfortunately I have to reject your "Big NO" and that is YES. Sir Issac Newton was influenced by the then thoelogy of Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) please read
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850. Please read some of the excerpts below for your ready references.
Br
Fareed
The lie of 1 John 5-7 Per Sir Isaac Newton
 
The following section was sent to me by brother Shahid; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.
 
Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible
 
In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."
 

Newton on I John 5:7

 
Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."
 
Newton on I Timothy 3:16
 
In all the times of the hot and lasting Arian controversy it never came into play . . . they that read "God manifested in the flesh" think it one of the most obvious and pertinent texts for the business. "The word Deity imports exercise of dominion over subordinate beings and the word God most frequently signifies Lord. Every lord is not God. The exercise of dominion in a spiritual being constitutes a God. If that dominion be real that being is the real God; if it be fictitious, a false God; if it be supreme, a supreme God."  Newton also wrote a discussion on two other texts that Athanasius had attempted to corrupt. This work has not been preserved. He believed that not all the books of the Scriptures have the same authority.  
 
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850.
 

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Thanks for asking me this question. My answer is a big NO. That's I have said that Newton's interpretation was unfortunate. For a brief period of despair Rabindranath experimented with planchette. Even at the age of 36, Jagadish Bose heard the clear voice of the river Bhagirathi telling him that she came from the "jataa" of Mahadev, and so on.
I feel good that as a physicist you have not yet found any thing thing wrong in what I have written below. Please feel free. I want to learn. I have made the same request to Prof. Das. 

From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2013 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
 
Do you think idea of "7th-Haven" came from seven heavenly lights? Just a thought!

--- On Sun, 1/6/13, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 11:09 AM

 
You are in the appropriate trade, so you will know better. Let me know if I am wrong. The visible portion of the electromagnetic radiation lying between infrared and ultraviolet radiation is a continuum and hence theoretically should have infinite colors, not only six or seven. So identification of I (Indigo) and B (Blue) in the well known VIBGYOR may not be artificial as we expect many more colors in this range not identifiable by our naked eyes. I am curious. 
By the by, I googled and found that telescope was not invented by Galileo. But it seems to be accepted by all that Newton built the first practical reflecting telescope. Telescopes are used to study planets. They are also used in labs along with the spectrometer. You can probably tell if Newton used telescope for this purpose. I thought he did. A prism disperses white light---knowledge of sixth-seventh grade science is enough to know this. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Now let me come to the main point. Was Newton ever influenced by theological beliefs in his scientific research? You have said, yes. I do not challenge that. It can happen. That is unfortunate. But if we look at his overall achievement, we see that experimentation and empirical observations were the basis of his formulations. It is the combination of sweat, systematic thought process, and genius that can lead to revolutionary discoveries and inventions.    
On Jan 5, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
I initiated it by saying that, being influenced by his faith, Newton saw seven colors in the spectrum in place of six, and the scientific community stuck to it.  I cited the example to show how faith influences science to a remarkable extent.

Reflecting telescope is irrelevant as a prism was used to disperse the components of sunlight.  You really have an appreciable ability to mix up things.
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
My statement was: Newton built the first reflecting telescope. The statement is still valid. 
I will still stick to my conclusion. Creative geniuses like Kalidas, 
Newton, Ramanujan, and Jagadish Bose were believers, but their achievements had nothing to do with gods or goddesses.  Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 7:41 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
You did it again, a reflection does not disperse sunlight into its components; refraction through a prism does.
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Newton built the first reflecting telescope. That should have been the sentence. Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 3, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
As usual you are wrong.  Telescope was invented by Galileo, and not Newton.  He decomposed sunlight by passing a beam of it through a prism, and not through a telescope.  Read basic physics again before you write something on it, Mr. Chakrabarty.

For Kalidas, about whose life little is known, it is very likely that his wife, Vidyadharee, came looking for him after she kicked him out of her bed.  He was found sitting on a stone besides the river Ksipra and contemplating suicide,  He misidentified her as the Goddess of learning, which in his days was named Kali/Saraswati.  In the mean time, one shock had opened his poetic nerve in the brain.  However, in the middle of a dark night, only her breasts were visible by the light emitted from her necklace, and he composed, "..Kuchajuga shovita muktahare"
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:23 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Jagadish
 Bose wrote an article in 1894 blending science with mythology. In his childhood he asked the Ganges, "River, where are you coming from?" He heard the voice of the Ganges, "From the jataa (interwoven hair) of Mahadev." At the age of 36, he asked the same question and he still heard the same distinct voice of the river Ganges, "Mahadever jataa hoite." There is no reason to believe that his scientific mind really heard the voice. Kalidas believed that it was the goddess Saraswati who made him write all the beautiful verses. The other day we read an article on the Indian mathematician Ramanujan who believed that all the theorems were revealed to him in dream from a god or goddess. Newton was a religious man. But his scientific works were not based on any faith. This is true for Jagadish Bose, Ramanujan, and all other scientists and mathematicians and even this is true for all the prophets or sages to whom knowledge was revealed. All the creations by humans were the result of sweat shed by them. There was nothing divine about them. Newton had to invent a telescope, for example, to study the nature of light.     
On Jan 1, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
One example of how faith influences science is the spectrum of sunlight as described by Sir Isaac Newton.  Nobody with common sense would find a difference between Blue and Indigo, but Newton did.  I suppose, he was deeply influenced by his heretic faith of Christian faith called Arian heresy.  He believed in the existence of seven heavens in which seven archangels sang religious songs, and probably as the light emitted by them reached the surface of earth, it became white(or colorless).  Religion is primitive science based mainly on cosmology and herbal therapy.  Mesopotamian civilization, in spite of being an advanced one compared to that of the Egyptians, did not need an afterlife and God(s) who would behave like a tyrant king, but the Egyptians needed such a creation of the priest king named Menes.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I believe you misread my comments. What I said is - how scientific assumptions can cross over to faith. Let me give you an example, some scientists believe in the man-made global warming theory, and when data did not support their belief, they manipulated data to stick to their belief. That's how science crosses over to faith.

Now, what is eternity? It's a big unknown, isn't it? Anytime you face an unknown, you are apprehensive about it, that's what I call a fear of the unknown. As you board a plane, you are apprehensive about what's lying ahead. This is a natural psychological response. Eternity is one such unknown. It is quite natural to wonder about the eternity. As we approach it - we get apprehensive about it. It's a fact. Isn't it? What's unscientific about the fear of eternity? I don't get it. Why are you thinking about punishment or reward? I am not talking about it?  I am talking about psychological response to the eternity, which is natural, if not scientific. Isn't it?

I think - you are trying to establish something that you already believe in, which I call faith-based discussion. Under this situation, you will not conceive alternative argument.

Jiten Roy
--- On Mon, 12/31/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, December 31, 2012, 7:54 AM
 
It may not be proper to use faith in the context of science. Science uses assumption, axiom, postulate, and hypothesis. But all of these are not wild guesses or imaginations. It is true that no formal proofs are offered, but they can be obvious and theories bases on these can have prediction capabilities. It follows the so called scientific method. 
Eternity of human life can be a philosophical proposition not a scientific one. So if you say that you have fear of eternity, then you are saying this on the basis of faith. Fear, right path, etc. cannot be scientific constructs, they can well fit into a religion--Godless or without God. Right path is a relative term and can be an important topic in ethics and moral philosophy. 
You have decided on your right path and as a matter of fact we all do. These are obviously important for an individual and the society he belongs to, but this is beyond the jurisdiction of science. 
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 30, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Assumption becomes faith when it is considered as truth, without any evidence. Scientists often assume (hypothesize) something, then investigate about its validity or truth. If they fail to validate, and yet believe in it, that becomes a faith.
 
There is another kind of assumption, in which a model is assumed which helps explain some unknown phenomena. If someone thinks that the model is the truth, and asks others to accept it - it becomes his faith. God and eternity are such phenomenological models to explain some unknowns. A scientist can assume these concepts if they help him understand those unknowns. Models can be physical structures or mathematical expressions. Therefore, if models have physical structures, they can be understood in a physical sense, as the concept of Gods and Goddesses in idols.
 
Fear of eternity/unknown is always with us. Such fears keep us in line. Some people can easily overcome fear of eternity or unknown, and can do certain things that most others can't imagine.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sun, 12/30/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, December 30, 2012, 9:13 AM

 
Fear of Unknown eternity? My humble question: Can a scientist believe in eternity in the physical sense? What is this fear about? Is it about any punishment that you may have to face? If this is so, then what are the remedies? Good works? Don't all these boil down to a concept of faith?  Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 28, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I don't know if my belief in God is circumstantial or what; it could be due to the fear of unknown eternity also. But, one thing I know for sure – I have no fear of God, if you are asking about that. I try to do everything right; that's all. Some people believe in almighty God, yet always claim to be victims of aggression from others. 
 
Anyway, I don't dwell on the existence of God or its form







__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity



"Therefore, you are a little off about concept of God as per Islam but I do understand where you are coming from."-----QR
 
That is very true. "God" (as a concept) being a mental construct in the realm of religion/philosophy/metaphysics is abslutely subjective. I will say that there are innumerable concepts of God. Each individual concept is characterized by it's own defintions of what God can do, does, and what He does not do, although the common belief is that He is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.

From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 5:40 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
 
In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?

>>>>>>>>>>>>> Islam says, everything is under God's control. God gave us certain freedom in( known as free will to western theologians) this world and we may use that to do good and may abuse the "Freedom" to commit crimes.

The misunderstood popular Bangladeshi belief about concept of God created many misunderstanding about religion in general. For example a thief does not take Allah's permission to steal. Every person was empowered by our Maker to make positive and negative contributions and we cannot blame God for bad actors. In every religious instructions, God told us to be righteous and make positive contribution to humanity.
On a different note, we cannot even conceive power of our Creator. God has control over everything but allow freedom to many of us to make choices. For example according to Islam, Allah (SWT) is all hearing. Which means He can listen to you and billion others at the same time. It is NOT difficult for Creator of the Worlds (Rabbul Aalameen). Therefore, you are a little off about concept of God as per Islam but I do understand where you are coming from. :-) Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Sun, Jan 6, 2013 5:00 pm Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
 
In the beginning - the belief was that everything happens at God's will, so wise men would somehow bring God into all those explanations to make them believable. Then came science, and started to reveal reality behind some of those unknowns, and many of the previous concepts were revised. We now know most of the things happen around us due to natural cause and effect, meaning God is not micro-managing them. Unfortunately, some of those believers still subscribe to the concept that – even a leaf cannot move without God's instruction. These people forget - God needs to manage billions of other planets and galaxies also; He cannot pay attention to a particular leaf. What are you going to do?
 
Anyway, Newton was a believer, but knew how to separate religion and science, not like many blind-believers of this forum, who are not learning anything also, unfortunately. May God show them 7 shades of light!

Jiten Roy


--- On Sun, 1/6/13, Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 4:32 PM

 
         Yes. It is true that Sir Isaac Newton was obsessed by the problem of the corruption of the text of certain sections of Scripture and seriously questioned the concept of Christ's divinity.  It was too big a controversy to enter into, and John Locke was wise to keep quiet about it. Newton had no problem getting his brilliant mathematics published, but these theological quarrels were a different matter altogether.  Newton had the good sense to keep the two separate.            These mukto-mona wallahs never learn any thing. They will repeat their own pet platitudes again and again.  Science was born out of religion, as any history of science, Oriental or Occidental, will reveal.
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com; jnrsr53@yahoo.com From: fareed.siddique123@gmail.com Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 23:39:45 +0300 Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity  
Hello Chakraborty
 
Unfortunately I have to reject your "Big NO" and that is YES. Sir Issac Newton was influenced by the then thoelogy of Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) please read
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850. Please read some of the excerpts below for your ready references.
Br
Fareed
The lie of 1 John 5-7 Per Sir Isaac Newton
 
The following section was sent to me by brother Shahid; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.
 
Sir Isaac Newton On The Bible
 
In 1690, Sir Isaac Newton (died 1727) wrote a manuscript on the corruption of the text of the New Testament concerning I John 5:7 and Timothy 3:16. It was entitled, "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."   Due to the prevailing environment against criticism, he felt it unwise to profess his beliefs openly and felt that printing it in England would be too dangerous.   Newton sent a copy of this manuscript to John Locke requesting him to have it translated into French for publication in France. Two years later, Newton was informed of an attempt to publish a Latin translation of it anonymously. However, Newton did not approve of its availability in Latin and persuaded Locke to take steps to prevent this publication.  Below are excerpts from "A Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture."
 

Newton on I John 5:7

 
Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament.  When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed.  In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books.  "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none.  If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best."
 
Newton on I Timothy 3:16
 
In all the times of the hot and lasting Arian controversy it never came into play . . . they that read "God manifested in the flesh" think it one of the most obvious and pertinent texts for the business. "The word Deity imports exercise of dominion over subordinate beings and the word God most frequently signifies Lord. Every lord is not God. The exercise of dominion in a spiritual being constitutes a God. If that dominion be real that being is the real God; if it be fictitious, a false God; if it be supreme, a supreme God."  Newton also wrote a discussion on two other texts that Athanasius had attempted to corrupt. This work has not been preserved. He believed that not all the books of the Scriptures have the same authority.  
 
Reference A. Wallace, "Anti-Trinitarian Biographies," Vol. III, 1850.
 
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 9:33 PM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Thanks for asking me this question. My answer is a big NO. That's I have said that Newton's interpretation was unfortunate. For a brief period of despair Rabindranath experimented with planchette. Even at the age of 36, Jagadish Bose heard the clear voice of the river Bhagirathi telling him that she came from the "jataa" of Mahadev, and so on.
I feel good that as a physicist you have not yet found any thing thing wrong in what I have written below. Please feel free. I want to learn. I have made the same request to Prof. Das. 
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 6, 2013 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
 
Do you think idea of "7th-Haven" came from seven heavenly lights? Just a thought!

--- On Sun, 1/6/13, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, January 6, 2013, 11:09 AM

 
You are in the appropriate trade, so you will know better. Let me know if I am wrong. The visible portion of the electromagnetic radiation lying between infrared and ultraviolet radiation is a continuum and hence theoretically should have infinite colors, not only six or seven. So identification of I (Indigo) and B (Blue) in the well known VIBGYOR may not be artificial as we expect many more colors in this range not identifiable by our naked eyes. I am curious. 
By the by, I googled and found that telescope was not invented by Galileo. But it seems to be accepted by all that Newton built the first practical reflecting telescope. Telescopes are used to study planets. They are also used in labs along with the spectrometer. You can probably tell if Newton used telescope for this purpose. I thought he did. A prism disperses white light---knowledge of sixth-seventh grade science is enough to know this. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Now let me come to the main point. Was Newton ever influenced by theological beliefs in his scientific research? You have said, yes. I do not challenge that. It can happen. That is unfortunate. But if we look at his overall achievement, we see that experimentation and empirical observations were the basis of his formulations. It is the combination of sweat, systematic thought process, and genius that can lead to revolutionary discoveries and inventions.    
On Jan 5, 2013, at 6:23 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
I initiated it by saying that, being influenced by his faith, Newton saw seven colors in the spectrum in place of six, and the scientific community stuck to it.  I cited the example to show how faith influences science to a remarkable extent.

Reflecting telescope is irrelevant as a prism was used to disperse the components of sunlight.  You really have an appreciable ability to mix up things.
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
My statement was: Newton built the first reflecting telescope. The statement is still valid. 
I will still stick to my conclusion. Creative geniuses like Kalidas, 
Newton, Ramanujan, and Jagadish Bose were believers, but their achievements had nothing to do with gods or goddesses.  Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 7:41 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
You did it again, a reflection does not disperse sunlight into its components; refraction through a prism does.
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Newton built the first reflecting telescope. That should have been the sentence. Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 3, 2013, at 8:01 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
As usual you are wrong.  Telescope was invented by Galileo, and not Newton.  He decomposed sunlight by passing a beam of it through a prism, and not through a telescope.  Read basic physics again before you write something on it, Mr. Chakrabarty.

For Kalidas, about whose life little is known, it is very likely that his wife, Vidyadharee, came looking for him after she kicked him out of her bed.  He was found sitting on a stone besides the river Ksipra and contemplating suicide,  He misidentified her as the Goddess of learning, which in his days was named Kali/Saraswati.  In the mean time, one shock had opened his poetic nerve in the brain.  However, in the middle of a dark night, only her breasts were visible by the light emitted from her necklace, and he composed, "..Kuchajuga shovita muktahare"
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:23 AM, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Jagadish
 Bose wrote an article in 1894 blending science with mythology. In his childhood he asked the Ganges, "River, where are you coming from?" He heard the voice of the Ganges, "From the jataa (interwoven hair) of Mahadev." At the age of 36, he asked the same question and he still heard the same distinct voice of the river Ganges, "Mahadever jataa hoite." There is no reason to believe that his scientific mind really heard the voice. Kalidas believed that it was the goddess Saraswati who made him write all the beautiful verses. The other day we read an article on the Indian mathematician Ramanujan who believed that all the theorems were revealed to him in dream from a god or goddess. Newton was a religious man. But his scientific works were not based on any faith. This is true for Jagadish Bose, Ramanujan, and all other scientists and mathematicians and even this is true for all the prophets or sages to whom knowledge was revealed. All the creations by humans were the result of sweat shed by them. There was nothing divine about them. Newton had to invent a telescope, for example, to study the nature of light.     
On Jan 1, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
 
One example of how faith influences science is the spectrum of sunlight as described by Sir Isaac Newton.  Nobody with common sense would find a difference between Blue and Indigo, but Newton did.  I suppose, he was deeply influenced by his heretic faith of Christian faith called Arian heresy.  He believed in the existence of seven heavens in which seven archangels sang religious songs, and probably as the light emitted by them reached the surface of earth, it became white(or colorless).  Religion is primitive science based mainly on cosmology and herbal therapy.  Mesopotamian civilization, in spite of being an advanced one compared to that of the Egyptians, did not need an afterlife and God(s) who would behave like a tyrant king, but the Egyptians needed such a creation of the priest king named Menes.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I believe you misread my comments. What I said is - how scientific assumptions can cross over to faith. Let me give you an example, some scientists believe in the man-made global warming theory, and when data did not support their belief, they manipulated data to stick to their belief. That's how science crosses over to faith.

Now, what is eternity? It's a big unknown, isn't it? Anytime you face an unknown, you are apprehensive about it, that's what I call a fear of the unknown. As you board a plane, you are apprehensive about what's lying ahead. This is a natural psychological response. Eternity is one such unknown. It is quite natural to wonder about the eternity. As we approach it - we get apprehensive about it. It's a fact. Isn't it? What's unscientific about the fear of eternity? I don't get it. Why are you thinking about punishment or reward? I am not talking about it?  I am talking about psychological response to the eternity, which is natural, if not scientific. Isn't it?

I think - you are trying to establish something that you already believe in, which I call faith-based discussion. Under this situation, you will not conceive alternative argument.

Jiten Roy
--- On Mon, 12/31/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Questions of God and Eternity
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, December 31, 2012, 7:54 AM
 
It may not be proper to use faith in the context of science. Science uses assumption, axiom, postulate, and hypothesis. But all of these are not wild guesses or imaginations. It is true that no formal proofs are offered, but they can be obvious and theories bases on these can have prediction capabilities. It follows the so called scientific method. 
Eternity of human life can be a philosophical proposition not a scientific one. So if you say that you have fear of eternity, then you are saying this on the basis of faith. Fear, right path, etc. cannot be scientific constructs, they can well fit into a religion--Godless or without God. Right path is a relative term and can be an important topic in ethics and moral philosophy. 
You have decided on your right path and as a matter of fact we all do. These are obviously important for an individual and the society he belongs to, but this is beyond the jurisdiction of science. 
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 30, 2012, at 6:15 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Assumption becomes faith when it is considered as truth, without any evidence. Scientists often assume (hypothesize) something, then investigate about its validity or truth. If they fail to validate, and yet believe in it, that becomes a faith.
 
There is another kind of assumption, in which a model is assumed which helps explain some unknown phenomena. If someone thinks that the model is the truth, and asks others to accept it - it becomes his faith. God and eternity are such phenomenological models to explain some unknowns. A scientist can assume these concepts if they help him understand those unknowns. Models can be physical structures or mathematical expressions. Therefore, if models have physical structures, they can be understood in a physical sense, as the concept of Gods and Goddesses in idols.
 
Fear of eternity/unknown is always with us. Such fears keep us in line. Some people can easily overcome fear of eternity or unknown, and can do certain things that most others can't imagine.
 
Jiten Roy
 
--- On Sun, 12/30/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, December 30, 2012, 9:13 AM

 
Fear of Unknown eternity? My humble question: Can a scientist believe in eternity in the physical sense? What is this fear about? Is it about any punishment that you may have to face? If this is so, then what are the remedies? Good works? Don't all these boil down to a concept of faith?  Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 28, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
I don't know if my belief in God is circumstantial or what; it could be due to the fear of unknown eternity also. But, one thing I know for sure – I have no fear of God, if you are asking about that. I try to do everything right; that's all. Some people believe in almighty God, yet always claim to be victims of aggression from others. 
 
Anyway, I don't dwell on the existence of God or its form


__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___