Welcome to Cutting Edge. Guests can see and read the contents of most of the boards on this forum but need to become members to read all of them. Currently membership is instant, but new accounts may be deleted if not activated within fourteen days.

If you decide to join the forum, please open your welcome message for further details. New members are requested to introduce themselves on the appropriate thread on our welcome board.

Members may post messages and start threads, but it is essential that they read our posting rules and advice before doing so. If you have any immediate questions or queries, please post them on the suggestions board.

After posting at least ten messages, members are able to contact each other and the staff through our personal messaging system.

This forum is administrated by Ivan and moonbeam and moderated by boatlady and astradt1.

Thank you for visiting Cutting Edge.

Can God love? (Part 1)

Page 23 of 25 Previous  1 ... 13 ... 22, 23, 24, 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Greatest I am on Wed Apr 25, 2012 9:40 pm

First topic message reminder :

Can God love?

We are told that the mythical bible God is love or the epitome of love.

Archetypal Jesus said that we would know his people by the love, deeds and actions they showed others.

Jesus gave us examples of the deeds and works. Feed the poor, love all our neighbours, do not sin and many others.

Love then, seems to Jesus, to be something that must be shown by deeds, actions and works to be alive and true love. Love, like faith, without works is dead. Both St. James and Jesus agree on this.

It follows then that if God is not doing something to show this love then the love for man expressed in scriptures is wrong and God cannot love.

You are in the image of God. When you love someone you show them that love by works and deeds. This is how the recipient of that love knows it is there and that allows for reciprocity.  You will agree that without reciprocity, true love cannot exist between two individuals. We must do things for each other for true love to exist.

Imagine what those you love would think if you never did anything to express your love. Imagine what you would think of the love of others towards you if they never did anything to show they loved you.  See what I mean. Love always must have deeds to be real and true and reciprocity must be at play.

Love then has no choice but to be expressed if it is true love.

We are told that God loved his son so much that he planned to have him sacrificed even before the earth was created. This human sacrifice or any other human sacrifice, voluntary or not, is immoral and the notion that it is good to sacrifice an innocent victim to give the guilty believers a free ride into heaven is a completely self-gratifying notion and is completely immoral. One does not show love for someone by having them sacrificed for the sins of others when God himself stated that we are all responsible for our own salvation and cannot put that responsibility of the shoulders of a scapegoat Jesus.

Does love need deeds and works to be expressed?

Have you seen God express his love for us lately?

Regards
DL

These following speak to this issue if you wish to view them.

[youtube]



avatar
Greatest I am

Posts : 1055
Join date : 2012-04-25

Back to top Go down


Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Tue Sep 25, 2012 5:56 pm

oftenwrong wrote:
There are no atheists in the foxholes

(anonymous infantryman, WW2)

Discuss.

I’ve been told that the quote is absolutely true. It might help to remember what the underlined text means when used by me.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:09 pm

There are no atheists in the foxholes

(Lieutenant Colonel Warren J. Clear)

Discuss..

Its your copy-paste, you prove it.


Last edited by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:11 pm

I’ve been told that the quote is absolutely true.

No more evidence required, it must be true.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Mel on Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:11 pm

"Hope, imagine, dream, pray etc etc...I sense a thinking pattern here."

Add-- Wished!!!! Very Happy

You are invisible to me Tosh and yet I think you may exist. If we were living in say the 14th century for example, how would I have known you actually existed unless I had had the pleasure of meeting you. Many may have declared to me "old Tosh exists", how could I have proven them wrong?
Perhaps I could have been told by Darwins ancestors that you were non existant. Who could I have believed? study

avatar
Mel

Posts : 1703
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:44 pm

[quote][quote]
You are invisible to me Tosh and yet I think you may exist. If we were living in say the 14th century for example, how would I have known you actually existed unless I had had the pleasure of meeting you. How would you have known of my existence ? Many may have declared to me "old Tosh exists", how could I have proven them wrong? Perhaps I could have been told by Darwins ancestors that you were non existant. Who could I have believed?

Mel, you seem to be struggling with a few basics, let me try and simplify things for you.

Knowledge of existence must be demonstrated by the claimant, end of story, the method of proof ( inductive or deductive) depends on what you are claiming exists.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, however without evidence one has no knowledge of existence.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:00 pm

The whole point of an objective scientific method was to eliminate subjective experience as a source of knowledge, we all can see darkness but darkness does not exist, and we can prove it.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:06 pm

snowyflake wrote:
So what happens to one’s cognizance after one’s physical death? Collectable, analyzable data addressing this question is nonexistent, so science cannot address, much less offer even tentative answers, to this tantalizing question.
Hi Rock Smile Science has addressed the question. The fact that there is no collectable, analysable data is because there isn't anything to collect or analyse on the physical demise of the brain. This is an age old question and humans are too afraid of dying....'not being'.....that they delude themselves into all kinds of fantasies of an afterlife. It might be comforting to some but I find the whole idea distasteful.

How are you anyway? Hope you and yours are well. Smile

Hey Snowy,

It’s good, very good. Another person and I are dealing with a challenge that, when met, will ensure that inner city kids, mostly Hispanic and Black, continue to receive vital life-preserving training. Look for a message with the details.

A Texish “grammar” lesson: Second person singular: “you.” Second person plural, 2 to 4: “y’all.” Second person plural, 5 or more: “all y’all”, sometimes pronounced “alla y’all.”

How are y’all? Envy at your recent adventure looms in my heart, but I’ll be all right (pronounced “ah-eye-t”, one syllable).

“The fact that there is no collectable, analysable data is because there isn't anything to collect or analyse…” True. That’s the point. When/Where there is no data to collect and analyze, no scientific inquiry can occur. And it’s not just the physical demise of the brain; the brain of a living person is the residence of the thoughts and emotions of the living person, but it in itself is not those thoughts and emotions. As Phillipe Wynn says in the following song, one of my favorites (5:04)…

Love Don't Love Nobody (The Spinners)
http://www.youtube.com/v/Vc0NcEtsGb4

… you can’t color a thought, and you can’t touch an emotion.

Without data, neither you nor anyone else can say with scientific certainty that “they delude themselves into all kinds of fantasies of an afterlife.” If one limits one’s knowledge to the knowledge obtainable through scientific inquiry, then one of necessity abdicates claim to knowledge obtained by other means, whatever those other means might be. I know that’s tough for one like you that is steeped in science, but one must realize and accept such limitations of knowledge if one is true to oneself. One thing that might interest you is that I lost fear of death eleven years ago. My concerns thereof now are based upon jobs I feel the need to complete prior to death of this house of my pilgrimage.

Anyway, you continue to amaze me by not realizing that Jesus, in one of his most poignant teachings, speaks highly of you.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:17 pm

Tosh wrote:The whole point of an objective scientific method was to eliminate subjective experience as a source of knowledge, we all can see darkness but darkness does not exist, and we can prove it.

But how can we be sure that the light has gone out when we close the door of the frig?
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11741
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by trevorw2539 on Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:50 pm

snowyflake wrote:
So what happens to one’s cognizance after one’s physical death? Collectable, analyzable data addressing this question is nonexistent, so science cannot address, much less offer even tentative answers, to this tantalizing question.

Hi Rock Smile Science has addressed the question. The fact that there is no collectable, analysable data is because there isn't anything to collect or analyse on the physical demise of the brain. This is an age old question and humans are too afraid of dying....'not being'.....that they delude themselves into all kinds of fantasies of an afterlife. It might be comforting to some but I find the whole idea distasteful.

How are you anyway? Hope you and yours are well. Smile

Science has addressed the question 'Can I find any collectable, analysable data that I can recognise within the limitations of science as I know it?'

avatar
trevorw2539

Posts : 1345
Join date : 2011-11-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:55 pm

But how can we be sure that the light has gone out when we close the door of the fridge.

We cannot know the light has gone out unless we provide evidence proving it, this evidence would be obtained by an objective scientific method. We can deduce with a high degee of probability the sun will rise tomorrow but we cannot be absolutely sure or know it will rise.

When people ask me to prove God does not exist I need to know what it is I am supposed to be disproving, this is rather difficult since God is unknowable. God is defined by its physical actions not its physical properties, if everything is evidence for God's existence and nothing counts as evidence against God's existence, then there is simply no evidence to test, the God hypothesis is devoid of any scientific content, things are the same with or without God.


avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:02 pm


Science has addressed the question 'Can I find any collectable, analysable data that I can recognise within the limitations of science as I know it?'

I believe this analogy sums up the insufficient tool set argument:

"A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage" Suppose I seriously make such an assertion to you. Surely you'd want to check it out, see for yourself. There have been innumerable stories of dragons over the centuries, but no real evidence. What an opportunity!

"Show me," you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle--but no dragon.

"Where's the dragon?" you ask.

"Oh, she's right here," I reply, waving vaguely. "I neglected to mention that she's an invisible dragon."

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon's footprints.

"Good idea," I say, "but this dragon floats in the air."

Then you'll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

"Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless."

You'll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

"Good idea, but she's an incorporeal dragon and the paint won't stick." And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won't work.

Now, what's the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there's no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.

Cool
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:18 pm

Cognitive bias describes the inherent thinking errors that humans make in processing information. Some of these have been verified empirically in the field of psychology, while others are considered general categories of bias. These thinking errors prevent one from accurately understanding reality, even when confronted with all the needed data and evidence to form an accurate view. Many conflicts between science and religion are due to cognitive biases preventing people from coming to the same conclusions with the same evidence. Cognitive bias is intrinsic to human thought, and therefore any systematic system of acquiring knowledge that attempts to describe reality must include mechanisms to control for bias or it is inherently invalid.

The best known system for vetting and limiting the consequences of cognitive bias is the scientific method, as it places evidence and methodology behind idea under open scrutiny. By this, many opinions and separate analyses can be used to compensate for the bias of any one individual. It is important to remember, however, that in every day life, just knowing about these biases doesn't necessarily free you from them.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#Biases_in_probability_and_belief


Last edited by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:46 pm

So we have people with cognitive bias and an invisble dragon, claiming the scientific method is not fit for purpose because in theory anything is possible.

Now I would like these same people to apply this kind of thinking to their everyday lives, and test its worth.

Science and rationality work, this is all the evidence I need to disregard a bare assertion inherited from our ignorant ancestors.



Last edited by Tosh on Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:55 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Mel on Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:08 am

Tosh, with all your scientific knowledge put before us day in day out, which is interesting, yet fails to confirm that God does not exist.

Many questions have been answered over the past century with scientific evidence on many subjects and many are still being answered. This will no doubt go on and on as time passes and scientific measures become more and more sophisticated.
Is it not strange Tosh, that science has proven so much that has surprised us to such a great extent and yet the non existance of God still has not been proven? There is a reason for this of course, IMO it is the very fact that God will not allow us to prove his non existance, as he will be the only one who will prove in the end to ALL living on earth that he really does exist. No doubt that time is drawing nearer and nearer and will happen before man destroys himself and the world he lives in.


avatar
Mel

Posts : 1703
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:30 am

Tosh, with all your scientific knowledge put before us day in day out, which is interesting, yet fails to confirm that God does not exist.

Mel, tell me how I can test God's existence and what evidence would you accept that disproves God's existence ?

Is it not strange Tosh, that science has proven so much that has surprised us to such a great extent and yet the non existance of God still has not been proven?

Nope, its not strange at all, the God hypothesis ensures God cannot be disproved, and this will still be the case even when we know everything.

There is a reason for this of course, IMO it is the very fact that God will not allow us to prove his non existance, as he will be the only one who will prove in the end to ALL living on earth that he really does exist. No doubt that time is drawing nearer and nearer and will happen before man destroys himself and the world he lives in.

I cannot take you seriously unless you remove the bone from your nose and stop dancing for rain.


Last edited by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:27 am; edited 2 times in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:24 am

IMO it is the very fact that God will not allow us to prove his non existance,

For an " unknowable " god, you seem to presume much more than its mere existence.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:24 am

Mel wrote:
… yet fails to confirm that God does not exist.

YHVH Elohim, God, is eternal, omniscient, and omnipresent. Only eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God can prove that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist; accordingly, one who proves that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist is eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:38 am

Only eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God can prove that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist;

Texas,

You are up rather late, an eternal omnipresent god disproving its own existence is an interesting oxymoron.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Shirina on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:58 am

YHVH Elohim, God, is eternal, omniscient, and omnipresent. Only eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God can prove that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist

A non-existent God cannot prove his own non-existence. Even if this paradox were somehow possible, the result of this would be, well ... absolutely nothing. It's not as if God is going to descend to earth and show you first hand that he doesn't exist. In fact, there are virtually infinite numbers of things that might be proving their own non-existence even as we speak, but we would never know or hear about them because they don't exist.

Ergo, based on what we know about God's existence, it stands to reason that the absence of evidence shows that God has proven his own non-existence.
avatar
Shirina
Former Administrator

Posts : 2232
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Right behind you. Boo!

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:50 pm

Shirina wrote:
YHVH Elohim, God, is eternal, omniscient, and omnipresent. Only eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God can prove that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist
A non-existent God cannot prove his own non-existence.

Non-eternal, non-omniscient, non-omnipresent ha adama, man gender inclusive, cannot prove the nonexistence of eternal, omniscient, omnipresent YHVH Elohim, God.

Shirina wrote:
Ergo, based on what we know about God's existence, it stands to reason that the absence of evidence shows that God has proven his own non-existence.

Two flaws in the logic:

  1. The plethora of evidence of YHVH Elohim’s eternal, omnipresent existence precludes the absence of evidence thereof.
  2. If there were an absence of evidence thereof, non-eternal, non-omniscient, non-omnipresent ha adama, man gender inclusive, would be unable to access data thereof.

The paradox stands as an example of science’s inherent limitation. To obtain knowledge, science must collect and analyze data. Inaccessible data cannot be collected and analyzed; thus, science cannot obtain knowledge from inaccessible data.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:43 pm

Two flaws in the logic:

The irony tickles me pink.

Only eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God can prove that eternal, omniscient, omnipresent God does not exist;


Non-eternal, non-omniscient, non-omnipresent ha adama, man gender inclusive, cannot prove the nonexistence of eternal, omniscient, omnipresent YHVH Elohim, God.



mmm, apart from this being total dross it fails to rebut this statement:

A non-existent God cannot prove his own non-existence.








avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:54 pm

The paradox stands as an example of science’s inherent limitation.

No such paradox exists and it is not an example of anything, least of all science's limitations.

I cannot believe you post this junk and expect to get away with it.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:48 pm

It's a commonly held belief that both Napoleon and then Hitler failed in their attempts to invade Russia for a similar reason - trying to fight the War on two fronts.

Our contemporary version is fighting a war on FIVE fronts in this Forum, but for how long?
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11741
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Wed Sep 26, 2012 5:57 pm

Our contemporary version is fighting a war on FIVE fronts in this Forum, but for how long?.

For as long as it amuses me and irritates you. What a Face

5 fronts against weak opposition is a walk in the park. Basketball
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Shirina on Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:04 pm

To obtain knowledge, science must collect and analyze data. Inaccessible data cannot be collected and analyzed; thus, science cannot obtain knowledge from inaccessible data.

Correction: To obtain knowledge, the data first must exist in the first place. Even assuming that the data exist but are merely inaccessible, this very inaccessibility means that we have no knowledge. This means two things:

1) That any religion that claims to have knowledge is lying.
2) That the agnostic position is the most logical position.

avatar
Shirina
Former Administrator

Posts : 2232
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : Right behind you. Boo!

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Wed Sep 26, 2012 7:26 pm

Agnosticism may appear to the individual as "the most logical position", but to the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith it's a declaration of War. I'm not like you - I'm better!
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11741
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by snowyflake on Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:13 pm

When/Where there is no data to collect and analyze, no scientific inquiry can occur. And it’s not just the physical demise of the brain; the brain of a living person is the residence of the thoughts and emotions of the living person, but it in itself is not those thoughts and emotions.

Do you think, Rock, that thoughts and emotions are separate from the brain? When someone is brain-dead, they are not experiencing thoughts and emotions but the brain can experience thoughts and emotions while in a comatose state. There is plenty of evidence for either. So if the brain doesn't function when brain dead, what makes people think their thoughts and emotions continue after death? Doesn't make sense does it?
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1209
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 58
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:32 am

Shirina wrote:
To obtain knowledge, science must collect and analyze data. Inaccessible data cannot be collected and analyzed; thus, science cannot obtain knowledge from inaccessible data.
Correction: To obtain knowledge, the data first must exist in the first place.

That’s not a correction; it’s an accurate addition which supports my statement. Watch:

“To obtain knowledge, science must collect and analyze data. Inaccessible data cannot be collected and analyzed; thus, science cannot obtain knowledge from inaccessible data. Moreover, to obtain knowledge, data must exist in the first place.”

See how that works?

Shirina wrote:
Even assuming that the data exist but are merely inaccessible, this very inaccessibility means that we have no knowledge.

We have knowledge that we have no scientifically-derived knowledge. As all knowledge is not scientifically-derived, absence of knowledge so derived does not equate to absence of knowledge.

Shirina wrote:
This means two things:

1) That any religion that claims to have knowledge is lying.

Nope. See above.

Shirina wrote:
2) That the agnostic position is the most logical position.

Perhaps, perhaps not. The counter to that is the fact that it is absolutely illogical to conclude that order occurs by random chance. The illogicity (not a word, but it ought to be) of that untenable conclusion helped move me from agnosticism. But then, I was an honest and humble agnostic who refused to close his mind to knowledge derived from all sources.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Guest on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:36 am

snowyflake wrote:
When/Where there is no data to collect and analyze, no scientific inquiry can occur. And it’s not just the physical demise of the brain; the brain of a living person is the residence of the thoughts and emotions of the living person, but it in itself is not those thoughts and emotions.
Do you think, Rock, that thoughts and emotions are separate from the brain?

Snowy,

Yes. However, I know that, insofar as we know, thoughts and emotions are “housed” within the brain, associated in some manner with chemo-electric “speaks” between synapses. This does not explain the difference in thoughts and emotions of two otherwise similar persons.

snowyflake wrote:
When someone is brain-dead, they are not experiencing thoughts and emotions but the brain can experience thoughts and emotions while in a comatose state.

A mystery indeed. I could say that I “saw” a person’s “person” depart their body as it happened. If I did so say, you might ask for supporting data, and I would admit that I have no such data. If data documenting what I “saw” exists, it is certainly inaccessible insofar as I know.

snowyflake wrote:
There is plenty of evidence for either.

Not exactly. There is ample evidence of brain activity in a comatose state, and evidence of no brain activity in a brain-dead state. We conclude from this evidence that thoughts and emotions occur within comatose brains and that no thoughts and emotions occur within brain-dead brains.

This conclusion can only hold validity within the sphere of our limited knowledge. I do not believe that we can conclude that thoughts and emotions are nonexistent in brain-dead brains; I do believe that we can reasonably believe that thoughts and emotions are nonexistent in brain-dead brains.

snowyflake wrote:
So if the brain doesn't function when brain dead, what makes people think their thoughts and emotions continue after death? Doesn't make sense does it?

In other words, it’s nonsense. Big Bang and Genesis 1:1 are also nonsense, but data points to the nonsense called “the singularity”, or “b’r’shythe”, as the beginning of existence as we know it.

I no longer fear nonsense, as “non-sense” is simply that which, by its very existence, defies our logical senses. In fact, it was fear of the nonsense of Steady State that fueled my foray into agnosticism.


Last edited by RockOnBrother on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:36 pm

Agnosticism may appear to the individual as "the most logical position", .

I do not accept agnosticism is the most logical position, even the most basic creator/design hypothesis( deism or panthenism) is not supported by sufficient evidence nor reason to adopt an agnostic stance. In laymens terms there is little rationale to even presuppose or deduce the universe was purposely and intentionally designed, one must already possess a cognitive bias to think otherwise.

There are countless spurious perceptions and bare assertions similar in scientific content that we disregard without a second thought, I fail to see why this particular hypothesis justifies agnosticism. I apply the same methodology in dismissing claims of an external consciousness that survives in some form following corporeal death.

What is obvous is both ideas come from our primitive ancestors who did not know much about anything and sought explanations copied from our natural world. God is an Alpha male father figure and our spirit is just us wthout a body, it is for these reasons and others that makes me disbelieve, and my disbelief is based on knowledge and rational thinking.

Once one extrapolates further than a basic creator/desiger hypothesis then agnosticism becomes completely untenable and illogcal, the physical claims in monotheism are obviously false and contradict modern science. One is simply adding more reasons not to believe, and one has to disregard common knowledge to be agnostic. I suspect few on here are agnostic about the age of the earth or evolution, the evidence is incontrovertible despite claims to the contrary.



but to the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith it's a declaration of War. I'm not like you - I'm better!

oftenwrong, it seems you have a fairly good reputation on here for being reasonable, this and your previous similar comment seriously threaten this perception.
According to you, agnostics are undecided out of some arrogant desire to be different, and according to you, the faithful are at war with the undecided because they believe agnostics think they are better.

I don't accept you can speak on behalf of the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith, it is at best a gross generalisation and at worst a complete distortion of religious attitudes to agnosticism.

Jesus died on the cross because he thought different to the masses, do you apply the same reasoning and believe he was arrogant and felt he was better than the masses ? If you don't then you are not a consistent thinker, I can deduce a few reasons why people may be uncertain, and arrogant certainty is not one of them.

I can only presme this is your personal view and to be honest it lacks the confidence of faith, I do not believe those with faith feel threatened by those uncertain about faith.




















Last edited by Tosh on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:09 pm; edited 3 times in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:02 pm

Yes. However, I know that, insofar as we know, thoughts and emotions are be “housed” within the brain, associated in some manner with chemo-electric “speaks” between synapses. This does not explain the difference in thoughts and emotions of two otherwise similar persons.

I believe you are referring to the individual property known as " qualia ", and I agree we cannot as yet explain or define it, however when we do you will still believe in an immortal soul. We are right back to everything counts as evidence for the hypothesis and no evidence disproves it.


avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:52 pm

Tosh wrote:
Agnosticism may appear to the individual as "the most logical position", .

I do not accept agnosticism is the most logical position ....



but to the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith it's a declaration of War. I'm not like you - I'm better!



I don't accept you can speak on behalf of the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith.

That's rich coming from someone who exhibits no such reluctance.

Jesus died on the cross because he thought different to the masses, do you apply the same reasoning and believe he was arrogant and felt he was better than the masses ? ....

I do not believe those with faith feel threatened by those uncertain about faith.

Then explain the burning of heretics, the Spanish Auto da fe and pogroms throughout human history. Jihadists make no distinction between practising Christians and non-believers, all such are infidels, silly man.




















avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11741
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Thu Sep 27, 2012 6:56 pm

That's rich coming from someone who exhibits no such reluctance.


Even if this was true ( which it is not), it does not excuse you. Discuss.

[quote]
Then explain the burning of heretics, the Spanish Auto da fe and pogroms throughout human history. Jihadists make no distinction between practising Christians and non-believers, all such are infidels, quote]

Is this supposd to support your claim:

Agnosticism: but to the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith it's a declaration of War. I'm not like you - I'm better!

and rebut mine.

I do not believe those with faith feel threatened by those uncertain about faith.



The quality of your rebuttal is beyond silly and I now know why you stick rigidly to copy/paste quotes and pretentious conundrums.


Most of the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith are not all Muslims, nor Jihadists, nor Heretic burners nor took part in the Spanish Inquisition. Most of the great mass of people who take refuge in their faith are tolerant of other beliefs and agnostics, and are not waging war on anyone except in your malfunctioning brain.


There is a minority who attack anything that opposes their faith, this includes other religions, atheists and other religious interpretations, what in the blazes does this have to do with our discussion on contemporary agnosticism ? Agnostics are not in opposition, they are sitting on the fence.

How many Jihadst attacks are aimed at people specifically because they are agnostic ? eh ? eh ?

For your information an agnostic is not an un-believer, they haven't made their mind up yet, waging war against them is hardly a sound evangelical tactic, dont see many converts resulting from this practice.

Are you feeling ok ?




avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Thu Sep 27, 2012 10:13 pm

This dialogue is closed.
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11741
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:31 am

This dialogue is closed..

It was fun while it lasted, and I thank you for your contributions from the bottom of my heart. Cool
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by polyglide on Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:11 pm

Far from being a threat, I feel those with no faith are lost souls.

They are missing out on one of the most enjoyable parts of a human life, a relationship with God that enables you to cope with all that the Devil throws at you.

It is not those with all the worldly goods that are the happiest, it is those who realise why we are on the earth and live life accordingly, be they the poorest or the most disabled, I see many bright and happy faces amongst
those who embrace God and are disadvantaged as far as worldly goods are concerned and the pathetic amongst those that do not.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:36 pm

Far from being a threat, I feel those with no faith are lost souls.

Don't you dare think differently from oftenwrong, you are not better than him, such arrogance causes wars.........................

.............and the occasional famous quote. Cool


Last edited by Tosh on Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by snowyflake on Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:05 pm

This conclusion can only hold validity within the sphere of our limited knowledge. I do not believe that we can conclude that thoughts and emotions are nonexistent in brain-dead brains; I do believe that we can reasonably believe that thoughts and emotions are nonexistent in brain-dead brains.

Hi Rock. The brain is the power house, the engine of the body. If the brain is dead and the body dies as a result, why would any other brain function continue after death? That doesn't make sense. Thoughts and emotions are fueled by brain function. It is not reasonable or logical to assume that all your other bodily functions stop but thoughts and emotions can continue. And if there are no synapses between the dendrites and axons there will be no thought or emotion. That's life....and death.

Take care of yourself Smile
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1209
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 58
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by polyglide on Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:57 am

Snowflake my dear, when the body dies all the organs are then totally irrelevant and therefore there is no need for their continuation, whilst memories and all the other involvements regarding the brain are important or there would be no point in having them, the organs you refer to are just necessary for the length of time the body lives, whilst the brain is an entirely different kettle of fish.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Tosh on Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:52 pm

when the body dies all the organs are then totally irrelevant and therefore there is no need for their continuation, whilst memories and all the other involvements regarding the brain are important or there would be no point in having them, the organs you refer to are just necessary for the length of time the body lives, whilst the brain is an entirely different kettle of fish..

mmm, I am never quite sure if you are being serious or not, you thnk funny.

The brain is an organ, it organises our senses, thoughts and feelings, and stores them within the brain, its called the memory. Unfortunately for your case the brain with its memory is not a diiffernt kettle of fish and the memory does not survive just because it is necessary for your imaginary immortal soul.

avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by snowyflake on Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:17 pm

Snowflake my dear, when the body dies all the organs are then totally irrelevant and therefore there is no need for their continuation, whilst memories and all the other involvements regarding the brain are important or there would be no point in having them, the organs you refer to are just necessary for the length of time the body lives, whilst the brain is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Polyglide, the brain is an organ just like any other organ in the body. If your memories are created in the brain, stored in the brain, which is made of tissue, neurons etc and it dies it stands to reason that thoughts cannot be created and anything that is stored in the brain dies with the brain. If your kidneys stop working when you die does your pee go somewhere else? What about your intestines? Your liver? Brain function is organic. It is not supernatural.

It is just a tad egomaniacal to believe that your personal thoughts and memories are so 'important' that they will transcend time and space.

I think you're just being funny here. No one can be this deluded surely?

avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1209
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 58
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Can God love? (Part 1)

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 23 of 25 Previous  1 ... 13 ... 22, 23, 24, 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum