I grew up atheist for 16 years. I had always kept an open mind towards religion, but never really felt a need to believe in it. My sister started going to a Wednesday night children's program at a church. Eventually, I was dragged into a Christmas Eve service. Scoffing, I reluctantly went, assuming that this was going to be a load of crap, but when I went, I felt something. Something that I've never felt before. I felt a sense of empowerment and a sense of calling. Jesus called upon my soul, just like he did with his disciples. he wanted me to follow him. Now, my life is being lived for Christ. He died on the cross for my sins, and the sins of everyone who believes in him. He was beaten, brutalized, struck with a whip 39 times, made to carry a cross up to the stage of his death. This I believe to be true, and I can never repay him for what he has done. I still have my struggles with Christianity, but I've found this bit of information most useful. Religion is not comprehensible in the human mind, because we cannot comprehend the idea of a perfect and supreme being, a God, but we can believe it in our heart, and that's the idea of faith. Faith is, even though everything rides against me believing in Jesus, I still believe in him because I know that it's true in my heart. I invite my fellow Brothers and sisters of the LORD to talk about how Jesus has helped you in your life. No atheists and no insults please
The same way we sense any emotional state. Usually what we pick up on are physiological changes. Usually chemical changes in the brain. These changes result in a number of physical changes that we can perceive, in some cases physically. In other people we can often detect these changes on a subliminal level. However if if we have trained ourselves we can conscientiously notice these signals, often in the form of pasturing in body language.
Well, it seems he missed that time, but because evolution theory is applied to the world, it becomes another means of understanding how great is God who made all of this.
Considering the processes involved I see it as a way God is completely useless in this particular case.
here could be one, though. As for starting it, doesn't it require some boost? Like abiogenesis/God/Us being space aliens/etc?
No, we have already replicated these first steps. In a way we have been able to replicate steps A, C, and D, we are currently just missing step B in abiogenesis. However we are likely to see results filling this gap in our knowledge in the next few years. Now if you want to fill this gap with "God did it" this would simply be the use of the God of the gaps fallacy, claiming to know an unknown.
So far I'm sticking with love, because true love exceeds emotions
No it doesn't it's a combination of emotional states. biologically speaking it's viewed in the same way thirst or hunger is viewed, functioning as a driving mechanism.
If, by any means, you recover from an NDE, and find out that you know something about someone else which appears true afterwards, and is complicated enough to not be a blind guess, does it still remain "oppycock"?
Yep... Our subconscious can pick up on lots of things we don't consciously perceive. In an unconscious state such things can come out.
In my opinion, if it isn't objectively God, then it isn't proof. If you saw it with your own eyes but cannot prove it to others then that's fine - but understand that people will disagree when you can't prove it.
What I quoted earlier back on page 247 covers this pretty well. I'll post it again cleaned up.
Seeing is believing. But seeing isn't knowing. Believing isn't knowing. Subjective convictions are meaningless in science, and eyewitness testimony is the least reliable form of evidence.
For example, if I go into my front yard and I see a large sauropod walking down the middle of my street, I will of course be quite convinced of what I see. I may be even more satisfied when I follow the thing and find that I can touch it, maybe even ride it if I want to. When I gather sense enough to run back for my camcorder, I may not be able to find the beast again, because I don't know which way it went. But that doesn't matter because I saw it, I heard it, felt it, smelt it and I remember all that clearly with a sober and rational mind. But somehow I'm the only one who ever noticed it, and of course no one believes me. Some other guy says he saw a dinosaur too, but his description was completely different, such that we can't both be talking about the same thing. So it doesn't matter how convinced I am that it really happened. It might not have. When days go by and there are still no tracks, no excrement, no destruction, no sign of the beast at all, no other witnesses who's testimony lends credence to mine, and no explanation for how a 20-meter long dinosaur could just disappear in the suburbs of a major metropolis, much less how it could have appeared there in the first place, -then it becomes much easier to explain how there could be only two witnesses who can't agree on what they think they saw, than it is to explain all the impossibilities against that dinosaur ever really being there. Positive claims require positive evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and that's what I'd need -since what I propose isn't just extraordinary; its impossible. But since there's not one fact I can show that anyone can measure or otherwise confirm, then my perspective is still subjective -and thus uncertain. Eventually, even I, the eyewitness, would have to admit that, although I did see it, I still don't know if it was ever really there -regardless whether I still believe that it was.
What kind of deity goes off and gets himself nailed to a cross, a roman treatment of execution? And if this God is so good, how is it that we have war, starvation, villainy and racism? Good question, eh?
Usually chemical changes in the brain. These changes result in a number of physical changes that we can perceive, in some cases physically.
This is also in the video I put out there - I think it'd help if I kept this up to date page-wise.
However if if we have trained ourselves we can conscientiously notice these signals, often in the form of pasturing in body language
Interrogators often can see if a person is lying, telling the truth, stalling, etc by looking simply at the direction they look, for instance.
Considering the processes involved I see it as a way God is completely useless in this particular case.
I can't help but lol :>
Now if you want to fill this gap with "God did it" this would simply be the use of the God of the gaps fallacy, claiming to know an unknown.
Which is a valid theory in the entire idea of "God" coming through as well.
No it doesn't it's a combination of emotional states. biologically speaking it's viewed in the same way thirst or hunger is viewed, functioning as a driving mechanism.
I think Vesperbot would view that as "Lust", given that the driving mechanism in this case would probably be the need for survival (as a race), thus being construed as sexual reproduction.
Yep... Our subconscious can pick up on lots of things we don't consciously perceive. In an unconscious state such things can come out.
Getting weirdly personal but I had a weird dream that was short but I got 3 messages from it, I'm not going to go into detail and it doesn't really matter if you believe me (because this is a backed up argument anyway) but from it I got out: 1) A comparison 2) An elaboration of something I already knew 3) A warning
Pretty weird, and I had continuous dreams around the same topic, they stopped once I started saying what the "roblem" was to others. Very strange, but I found it interesting nonetheless
What kind of deity goes off and gets himself nailed to a cross, a roman treatment of execution? And if this God is so good, how is it that we have war, starvation, villainy and racism? Good question, eh?
Which is a valid theory in the entire idea of "God" coming through as well.
No more then claiming it was magic pixies.
I think Vesperbot would view that as "Lust", given that the driving mechanism in this case would probably be the need for survival (as a race), thus being construed as sexual reproduction.
There are many other overlapping stages in love, with lust only being one of them. There are also bonding aspects that aren't accounted to lust and lasts after lust fades.
Here's a question for you Vesper. What do you think of people who cannot experience love? They have brain damage or something, and no longer are capable of feeling it. If it were the soul, then why would a physical defect cause you to lack it? More so, if you do things that are supposedly, "Bad for your soul" why do we not see these "Immoral" people constantly sick from some unknown cause?
Appearing true and proven to be true are two different things.
Well, I was speaking about the situation, where a NDE'd person revealed what he perceived in that state, which was then checked and verified as true.
Let's start with the ancient earth ~4.7 billion years ago.
A long story, but it misses a crucial component - a transcriptase, the protein that actually forms other proteins from the information stored in RNAs. Chaining is ok, self-replicating without necessary proteins is not.
What?
Read some 10 pages back, I wrote a story of Jean Marie Vianney receiving such an info. Actually that story is documented.
Which is why I'm going to throw this out there as hopefully a first step towards that.
I am aware of abiogenesis theory, but so far it only explains how a single aminoacid could be a result of non-organic reaction going on the young Earth, but not other things necessary to create something that can clone, be it even a molecule.
The same way we sense any emotional state. Usually what we pick up on are physiological changes. Usually chemical changes in the brain. These changes result in a number of physical changes that we can perceive, in some cases physically. In other people we can often detect these changes on a subliminal level. However if if we have trained ourselves we can conscientiously notice these signals, often in the form of pasturing in body language.
This describes passion instead of love. I agree we can feel passion towards other people, sexual attraction included, and we don't require a soul to feel this. Still, there is more in love than passion.
What do you think of people who cannot experience love? They have brain damage or something, and no longer are capable of feeling it.
What would you say about those people who were in love with each other but after a year their love was as good as gone? And they had no brain damage, or otherwise they did not suffer anything that can alter the brain. I see them constantly around me, divorces flourish, and those who are going through argued about money and/or children, who actually suffer. But about those with damaged brains, they maybe cannot express love, so others could see, but they can still love.
More so, if you do things that are supposedly, "Bad for your soul" why do we not see these "Immoral" people constantly sick from some unknown cause?
Would you be surprised if I will give you a theological reason? There is a parable of a rich man and poor Lazarus lying in front of his gate, told by Jesus. Or I can come out with more mundane approach. Rabbits who get their brain severed to prevent excess movement, still survive and breed, and otherwise look healthy, while they lack many brain functions. A druggie who does the same for his brain firstly looks normal and behaves as normal, and only after several months or years, depending on the drug, there are changes that make him visible as a druggie. An irradiated person can act for several days, after which he dies a death I cannot imagine how horrible. The damage done to one's soul does not often bring immediate consequences.
Not if the part of the brain that controls that emotion is damaged/destroyed. I'm not talking about losing interest, i'm talking about being physically incapable of loving anything, like someone who is blind is physically incapable of seeing.
Would you be surprised if I will give you a theological reason?
No, but i'd accept a theological one if it was rational and logical.
The damage done to one's soul does not often bring immediate consequences.
Can you provide any evidence what so ever of someone ever having an injury to the soul that was noticable in some way?
I am aware of abiogenesis theory, but so far it only explains how a single aminoacid could be a result of non-organic reaction going on the young Earth, but not other things necessary to create something that can clone, be it even a molecule.
It's not restricted to a single amino acid forming. For instance vials from the original Miller Urey experiment were reexamined to find over 20 different amino acids had formed. There is some evidence different gases were used in the Urey experiment, when corrects to this were made we got an even more diverse number of amino acids. From amino acids we can explain how simple self replicating molecules can form. However we are currently unsure of the order in which some steps took place. We have a number of different models all showing promising results. We just need to figure out which is the most likely.
This describes passion instead of love. I agree we can feel passion towards other people, sexual attraction included, and we don't require a soul to feel this. Still, there is more in love than passion.
No I was describing love from a biological perspective. passion doesn't include the bonding in love.
Christ, why the hate atheists? You people dont get it. There is war because we dont deserve peace. There is Hell because even if He does forgive you, evil still needs to be punished, and why would you think you deserve Heaven when you dont even believe in it? THAT is the good question, huh?
Christ, why the hate atheists? You people dont get it. There is war because we dont deserve peace.
The way religion degrades one self just as you have stated here would be one reason among many. It's ridiculous we have to apologize for being human.
There is Hell because even if He does forgive you, evil still needs to be punished, and why would you think you deserve Heaven when you dont even believe in it?
As you said it's for punishing evil, we are evil, we simply don't buy the story. If that alone makes us worthy of hell it is an unjust system. Not to mention how it's suppose to be eternal in which it becomes an infinite punishment for a finite transgression, again making it an unjust system.
LOL good one this guy wasn't an Athiest whou found religion. Know how I'm sure of that? Because the whole idea of religion coming into someone's life without it being force fed to them from birth by pushy parents who'd give their individuality to get into heaven and ezpect their children to do the sam, is make belief.
No atheists and no insults please?
I've seen more athiest here than jesus freaks by the comments I've read so far. Sorry buddy, you can't seclude people based on their views, that's bigotry. That's like putting up a link asking people to share stories of their adversity, and putting in captions " No Holocaust survivors."
And the 6 million dead Jews during WWII deserved to die, right?!
. There is Hell because even if He does forgive you, evil still needs to be punished,
So basically he's forgiving me but still tortures me for an eternity? Seems just.
and why would you think you deserve Heaven when you dont even believe in it?
If there was something like heaven then believing in God shouldn't be a criteria for getting there. Why do we need to believe in God or heaven? Isn't it enough to be a good person? What's wrong with your God's self-esteem? (I know, I'm an angry atheist)
