I'm often arguing about myths of religion. Though I am an atheist I won't outright state there is no God as it is impossible to disprove. I can however say with absolute certainty that the universe ...
I think that you should take Science and Religion seriously. I hold that God is the Creator, Designer and Sustainer of the World. He has communicated the truth to us in two aspects: the Bible (called "Tree of Life") is the scriptural or verbal aspect of God's communication and Nature (called the "Tree of Knowledge") is the concrete aspect of God communicating to us in things. Both the natural and verbal messages require tremendous effort, insight and pious attention to understand them . I know that there is nothig new in what i said and that many great scientists (Isaac Newton is one of them) have said this before, but i felt that i had to repeat these words to face the cheap and superficial rejection encountered here.
Harry--Haven't you noticed that the foundational text of your beliefs has been discredited. Newton was a great scientist who did believe in the Bible but he is out of date. Newton was unorthodox in that he did not believe in the immortal soul (which is not in the Bible either), the trinity, devils and demons. Nevertheless, Newton wrote a long time ago.
Now-a-days his laws of motion and force are relevant but his Bible has been discredited by discoveries in evolutionary biology and cosmology. The origin of man and the earth were not by supernatural creation but by the evolution of natural forces. Newton did establish the primacy of observation over authority. Seeking a god of the gaps has never been fruitful since science has always been able to fill its own gaps. Do you just making judgments like these are cheap and superficial rejections or do you provide evidence to support your positions in reply to critical observations about scriptures? Perhaps doing nothing but giving sermons is a shallow answer. For me, science trumps superstition and myth every day of the week. Doesn't inquisitiveness and reason pay homage to any possible god?
Physialist, I am saying that you are making superficial judgments about the word of God and now i want to add that your statements are not true either. For instance you deny that the soul is in the Bible. It is there right in the beginning:"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed in his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul" (Genesis 1: 7) Concerning the immortality of the soul, this is inferred from the concept of resurrection. See for instance sentences like: "...I kill and I make alive, I wound and I heal" (Deuteronomy 32: 39) or "But go thou thy way till the end be : for thou shalt rest and shalt stand up for thy alloted portion at the end of the days." (Daniel 12:13)
My recollection of the Bible is that the resurrection is where the soul is supposed to have been used in the manner that soul is usually defined. The Bible indicates that Jesus was resurrected in body not soul. Thus the use of soul as the entity that is resurrected is just not there. Right? I am always open minded and willing to shown to be wrong. I gladly welcome your criticism as well as correction on matters that are subject to confirmation. I do thank you.
Correct: resurrection is restitution of the spirit to the body. "And you shall know that I am the Lord when I have opened your graves, O my people, and have brought you up out of your graves, and I shall put my spirit in you, and you shall live..."(Ezekiel 37:13,14). Of course i don't know what spirit is exactly as i don't know what consciousness is. According to the text, it is something that belongs to God and which allows us to be alive and to become aware of ourselves and of the World around us, once it is breathed into our nostrils. What i would like to know how much this spirit can conserve of its pricipium individuationis when the body dies. For this assume that your localized consciousness is more like a particle and imagine that it can expand like a wave and fill the room you are in. I am sure you'll enjoy that experience, called ecstasy. Obviously, this is far away from the topic under discussion.
Physicalist, i don't feel confortable about what i said yesterday. Resurrection does not exhaust what the Bible tells us about the spirit. It describes also a metaphysical World of forms, a kind of metaphysical afterlife in what Plato would have called the World of Ideas. See Samuel I Chapter 28.
Harry there is never going to be any point trying to reason with any atheist. Were you aware that Physicalist makes all his ill-gained money from the grossest smut that has ever been sold -- and he sends those grotesque links to ministers?
We are all quite clearly aware of the factr that all atheists are violent bigots and will resort to violence to get their way, but to bombard a MINISTER with incessant heaps and wads of this is truly the finest thing that any atheist has ever done.
Here is what Physicalist has been sending all over Yedda to people who have better morals than to tolerate that sort of filth: www.kink.com . Whatever you do, do not let your kids log into that disgusting atheist net site. It involves sexual violation, torture, and much worse.
Only atheists could be so disgusting. Yet Physicalist has proven of all atheists repeatedly that no atheist is one bit different from that.
Just plain disgusting, like atheism itself.
Bob, Physicalist never used filth in the dicussion with me and i hope that there is a mistake in what you said because it just does not square with what is acceptable in Yedda. Now, Alvin Plantinga, a philosophy professor at Notre Dame thinks that atheism is a cognitive malfunction. I believe that this malfunction is due to an underdeveloped faculty of faith. This is a very sad state of affairs, because believing that the laws of nature is all there is deprives one of freedom of choice. Belief in nature as the supreme being is idolatry that leads us to consider ourselves as objects enslaved to the laws of nature.