The Bible

Originally posted by Linkalicious
Why can't they just disappear? They have no physical location in the world, they are merely a part of our brains that functions while our brain still functions.

So you're saying that if our brain stops functioning we can't no longer think, experience, or even understand anymore?

Originally posted by Linkalicious
Our thoughts and knowledge are all a direct result of our physical person. If you never had a brain, then those thoughts would cease to exsist because there would be no brain to capture them, so why is it impossible to believe that once the brain stops functioning physically...that our thoughts and knowledge stop functioning as well.

So you need physical objects in order to understand and be reasonable? Ever heard of forms? those things that philosophers always are discussing. Or what? you're gonna say "I reject Metaphysics"?

Originally posted by Linkalicious
why can't it just go "poof in the air? That's how they thoughts go their in the first place.....POOF! They appeared. Easy come....easy go.

So how do you explain consciousness? Is something that just appears and disappaers? if that's the case then I guess what I've learn up to this point it will go POOF into the air and disappear? Easy come...easy go. Right, Link?

Originally posted by Linkalicious
Yes, death is the end. Once your brain ceases to function...so does eveything else in YOUR world. (not THE world) I don't believe humans have a soul, or an essence. I believe those to be more things thought up in the human imagination to go along with God/Heaven/and Hell.

Here is where we disprove each other.......Death cannot be the end. Because we are NOT death yet, we cannot know what death is until we die. Thus we can only SPECULATE what death might be. For you to say death is the END then that means you've already die and you came back to tell me is the end. It also applies to me with my theory of the mind continues after our physical body has stop functioning. We can only know when we die? Speculate, that's what we can do.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
What is a soul? what is this "essence"? It's nothing. It's something you tell yourself exsists in order to comfort yourself. Because without a soul, you can't get into heaven....but what is heaven? it's just a place you created in your mind to comfort your thoughts and your beliefs about our exsistance.

For thousands of years people have been looking for a high purpose in life. Why is it that living life itself isn't the highest purpose?

Disagree, for thousands of years people have been looking for answers. Thanks to philosophy, science, and religion we'd found something helpful. Unfortunally some individuals take what little knowledge we as humans have discovered and settle for that! There is more to find out there. To say God doesn't exists just because there is not enough evidence is simply the easy way out of dilema. Science says that there is no God.....well, try Philosophy for a change. Trust me is much more challenging than gathering data or experimenting.

Okie FE my bad but can someone please tell me how old the human race is according to the bible?

if my memory serves: 6000 (BC) + 2000 (AD) = 8000 years, Fire

well that's utter crap, there are tons of data gathered by scientists proving that even mankind existed before 6.000 BC

you already posted the problem in your reply:

Originally posted by Fire
by scientists

sorry but if you're not even gonna agree with proven dating methods you can just as well say that ppl can fly

excuse me, but according to my calculations, if you have big ears, you can! 😠

We humans have a tremendous capacity for filtering, distorting or spinning any text we read, any event we observe, any truth we learn. The biblical writers and editors were no different in this respect than any of us.

The authority of the Bible does not stand or fall over the issue of whether it is entirely free of error. This debate illuminates very little. The authority and inspiration of the Bible rests upon the fact that century after century, generation after generation, people have found wisdom and inspiration upon its pages.

Good post Storm. Short and to the point. 🙂

Originally posted by WindDancer
So you're saying that if our brain stops functioning we can't no longer think, experience, or even understand anymore?

BINGO! ✅

So you need physical objects in order to understand and be reasonable? Ever heard of forms? those things that philosophers always are discussing. Or what? you're gonna say "I reject Metaphysics"?

No, I do not need physical objects in order to understand and be reasonable, and at no point did I ever state something like that. I said that without a brain, such things as thoughts, memories, and knowledge cease to exsist. If you never had a brain to capture that knowledge...then it wouldn't exsist.

Yes, i've heard of forms, and no i don't reject metaphysics....where are you coming from with this. I simply stated that without a brain...thought is impossible.

So how do you explain consciousness? Is something that just appears and disappaers? if that's the case then I guess what I've learn up to this point it will go POOF into the air and disappear? Easy come...easy go. Right, Link?

No, you're contorting what I've said in order to make some sort of point. I said that once your brain ceases to function (not seconds after it, but completely...as in death) that those thoughts are gone, because you have no means of accessing them. Conscious and Sub-conscious thought REQUIRE a functioning brain. When you're dead...your brain isn't functioning.

Like when you turn off a computer. Yah, the information is in there...but you can't obtain the information without turning the computer back on. (bad analogy)

What's your explanation for your reason in believing that humans retain their thoughts and memories after death?

Here is where we disprove each other.......Death cannot be the end. Because we are NOT death yet, we cannot know what death is until we die.

How ass backwards is that?

"Death cannot be the end because we are NOT death yet"

that isn't a reason...that's jibberish. Life works from begining to end, not the other way around. Of course I haven't experienced death yet...because I haven't reached my end yet.

Thus we can only SPECULATE what death might be. For you to say death is the END then that means you've already die and you came back to tell me is the end. It also applies to me with my theory of the mind continues after our physical body has stop functioning. We can only know when we die? Speculate, that's what we can do.

No, for me to say that....it means that I'm stating my BELIEF. It does not mean that I have died already and come back to tell you it is the end, because if i came back to tell you that death is the end.....then DEATH couldn't be the end because I'm there telling you about it.

But by your reasoning, since there is something beyond death, then you must be the one that has died and come back to tell about it, because there is SOMETHING to tell about.

My reasoning states...you can't come back to life...because DEATH IS THE END.

Disagree, for thousands of years people have been looking for answers. Thanks to philosophy, science, and religion we'd found something helpful. Unfortunally some individuals take what little knowledge we as humans have discovered and settle for that! There is more to find out there. To say God doesn't exists just because there is not enough evidence is simply the easy way out of dilema. Science says that there is no God.....well, try Philosophy for a change. Trust me is much more challenging than gathering data or experimenting.

I've taken Philosophy classes, at an introductory level. It is a very very interesting subject, but it does not change my opinion in any way shape or form.

The idea of God is toooooo vague to ever fully grasp. Try for as many thousands of years as you would like....search every corner of this universe. You'll find that God comes in all shapes and sizes....because the concept of God is something only intelligent beings like humans are capable of making up.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
How ass backwards is that?

"Death cannot be the end because we are NOT death yet"

that isn't a reason...that's jibberish. Life works from begining to end, not the other way around. Of course I haven't experienced death yet...because I haven't reached my end yet.

What the? of course that sounds backwards! Because you obviously quoted me from a single sentence! Did you forget the part where I say we can only speculate.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
No, for me to say that....it means that I'm stating my BELIEF. It does not mean that I have died already and come back to tell you it is the end, because if i came back to tell you that death is the end.....then DEATH couldn't be the end because I'm there telling you about it.

But by your reasoning, since there is something beyond death, then you must be the one that has died and come back to tell about it, because there is SOMETHING to tell about.

My reasoning states...you can't come back to life...because DEATH IS THE END.

So you reject the idea of reincarnation and all that other stuff that states. That's cool it's your opinion.

Originally posted by Linkalicious
I've taken Philosophy classes, at an introductory level. It is a very very interesting subject, but it does not change my opinion in any way shape or form.

The idea of God is toooooo vague to ever fully grasp. Try for as many thousands of years as you would like....search every corner of this universe. You'll find that God comes in all shapes and sizes....because the concept of God is something only intelligent beings like humans are capable of making up.

You keep saying that we made God. So if any posibilities of proving that God might exists are also made up? I guess any attempt to prove God goes out the window with you. So why continue to discuss about God since you have come to the decision that there is NO God. Which I'm curious how did you came to the point in saying that God is a creation of humans?

WD I've read quite a few things on philosophers trying to prove god, I never found one that totaly convinced me to be honnest, then again I never said that god doesn't exist I just say I don't believe in him.

Is not so much trying to convince a person Fire. Is about having, what we call "A second opinion". I'm sure there are reasons why ppl reject God. And I can understand, but to say God doesn't exist......mmmh sounds to simple. Philosophers are humans and can also make mistakes, so do Scientists, and also religious ppl. That's why I keep saying we can only speculate.

CAN someon prove that he Doesn't exits?

No.

because in order to prove something doesn't exsist. You need to prove that it exsists in the first place...

I can prove HE exist to me. I feel his presence, his Love, he answers my prayers, i've developed a relationship w/him, I'VE seen his miraclees and healings...........what do you have to prove he doesn't exist??? YOU got nothing.

Link> 😆

FE> Have you considered just copying the parts of my post directed at you? Having entire posts copied takes up a lot of space.

Again: How do you know the Bible is the word of God? Has he told you so?

🙄 Yes, you ARE comparing homosexuality with stealing, back-stabbing and cheating.
No person HAS to steal. It’s not something your hormones tell you, right? Neither is back-stabbing or cheating. Then there’s adultery – feeling attracted to someone elses spouse. Well, let’s say I feel attracted to someone elses husband. He’s not the ONLY man on the planet, so if I choose not to, I still know I can find love and sex in my life.
But you’re asking homosexuals to NOT give in to their evil urges. They may NEVER love and NEVER have sex in your book.
Tell me: Is it BEING homosexual – loving people of your own gender that you view as sinful. Or is it having sex with them?

Answer my questions:
If we are to take the Bible literally, then:
- Must we KILL all homosexuals (Romans 1: 26-28)?
- Must we circumcise all boys (Genesis 17:14) or abandon them?
- Is bigamy allowed? (Starting in Genesis 4:19)?

Did Abraham commit adultery with Hagar?
Did Abraham marry his sister with God's blessing?
Did Lot allow the mob to rape his daughters?
Did Lot have sex with his daughters?

Biblical family values DO leave something to be desired.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/fv/long.html
Yep, adultery, incenst and bigamy.

These things are horrible. Homosexuality is not. So, no thanks. I don't want anything to do with your God!

WindDancer> First of all: Thank you for taking the time to write and long and extensive post. Appreciated 🙂

#1 I’m not familiar with everyone you mention, but I hope that’s not necessary for getting the idea of their theories.
So let me see if I get the ideas: Anselm starts out with an ide of ”a being of which no greater can be conceived.”
Aquinas tries to prove the existence of God from a rational understanding of ordinary objectys that we experinece with our senses?

So Aquinas uses this?
1. Premise: Every event has a cause
2. Premise: The universe has a beginning
3. Premise: All beginnings involve an event
4. Inference: This implies that the beginning of the universe involved an event
5. Inference: Therefore the beginning of the universe had a cause
6. Conclusion: The universe had a cause

The proposition in line 4 is inferred from lines 2 and 3. Line 1 is then used, with the proposition derived in line 4, to infer a new proposition in line 5. The result of the inference in line 5 is then re-stated (in slightly simplified form) as the conclusion.
Even if we reach the conclusion that The Universe had a cause, this cause need not be God. Time had no meaning before Big Bang, there were only strange qunatum fluctuations and strings. If you wait long enough the improbable will happen. If you wait forever – the impossible will happen. If there is NO time (which cause and effect depends upon) the impossible happens.

”What causes this motion? You can obviously say it's physics. But if we make the question more deeper we come up with....What is the purpose of this motion? Why should it keep moving? Is it God using his powers to move and object? Sure we can explain motion using Physics. But can physics tell us the purpose of the motion? Because, our intellects always want to find a purpose for a thing. In this case the movement.”
The purpose? Woaw, wait. To me that is taking a rather drastic step in the middle of everything. Who says something must HAVE a purpose?

The tree and not-be. Auch! 🙂
”Will we find God since he is our creator? Possible. We need to unlock our first experiences in order to find God.”
I assume you mean: Is it possible to find God as being humankinds primordial creator?

Fire> I’m sure. But that doesn’t mean their ideas can’t be interesting to discuss.

NO i am not comparing and i've already explained that to ya, you just can't accept it. Just cuz you have a desire doesn't make it right.

and yeah i can just copy part of it, thxx i'm knew here so i'm sure how to do everything. thxxx.

OMEGA: But you’re asking homosexuals to NOT give in to their evil urges. They may NEVER love and NEVER have sex in your book.
Tell me: Is it BEING homosexual – loving people of your own gender that you view as sinful. Or is it having sex with them?

IT's having a relationship w/the same sex thats wrong. You're suppose to Love everyone, but there is diff types of LOVE also. You don't love a friend the same way you love your spouse or mate.

WD> #2 “All possible beings, therefore, at one time did not exist, will exist for a time, and will finally pass out of existence.”
How did you reach that conclusion? Something being possible doesn’t mean it will happen – statistically speaking it CAN, but it does not have to.

“Once possible things do come into existence, they can cause other similar possible beings to be generated, as when parents beget children, and so on.”
Huh? The first planet around some planet didn’t beget any children… Sure, other planets did start to form, but a planet does not CAUSE other planets to form.
Life began as organic molecules. The first time these molecules bonded to create actual life, that was it. The first microbe (or amoeba or something) started without other microbes. Just as the first star ignited without other stars “parenting” it.
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something… ?

“In our experience we find that some beings are more and some less good, true, and noble.”
Well, that is OUR, humankinds, view of other creatures. Lions are the kings, hyenas are evil … and then it turned out hyenas may actually hunt and lions scavenge.
This hierarchy is based on animals we view with awe, animals we fear, and animals we loathe. The hierarchy is mankind’s invention.

“There must be something that is truest, noblest, and best.”
These adjectives are something we – humans – place on things. Spiders are generally loathed, but man would we be in mosquito-hell without them.

“Proof from Order of things.”
Parts of the human body are still controlled by intelligence – the human brain. That’s why they behave in an orderly manner.
"it is plain that they achieve their end, not fortuitously, but designedly".
Many organisms show features of appallingly bad design. This is because evolution via natural selection cannot construct traits from scratch; new traits must be modifications of previously existing traits. This is called historical constraint. A few examples of bad design imposed by historical constraint:
In parthenogenetic lizards of the genus Cnemdophorus, only females exist. Fertility in these lizards is increased when another lizard engages in pseudomale behavior and attempts to copulate with the first lizard. These lizards evolved from a sexual species so this behaviour makes some sense. The hormones for reproduction were likely originally stimulated by sexual behaviour. Now, although they are parthenogenetic, simulated sexual behaviour increases fertility. Fake sex in a parthenogenetic species doesn't sound like good design to me.
In African locust, the nerve cells that connect to the wings originate in the abdomen, even though the wings are in the thorax. This strange "wiring" is the result of the abdomen nerves being co-opted for use in flight. A good designer would not have flight nerves travel down the ventral nerve cord past their target, then backtrack through the organism to where they are needed. Using more materials than necessary is not good design.
In human males, the urethra passes right through the prostate gland, a gland very prone to infection and subsequent enlargement. This blocks the urethra and is a very common medical problem in males. Putting a collapsible tube through an organ that is very likely to expand and block flow in this tube is not good design. Any moron with half a brain (or less) could design male "plumbing" better.

Using Analogy to prove God.
This makes NO sense to me. Without the Archer the arrow wouldn’t exist. No one would even think of arrows. The arrow and the archer are linked, yes, but only because the archer came UP with the idea of sticking a pointy stone to a small rod and firing it at animals.
What makes us human is just that. Human traits.

“To say that there is an analogical relationship between God and humanity is to say that man resembles God.” That’s a hypothesis.
“Humanity derives it's very existence from God, and this fact accounts for the common elements in both God and humanity.” I’d say god derives his/her/its existence from humanity, and THIS fact account for the common elements in myths and religious stories.

“When we use the word Wise, we refer to an attribute perfectly realized in God and only partially realized in humanity.”
Because humans have attributed to divinities attributes they see as preferable.