Proof of Immortality, VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wait....


We are expecting* coherent logic from someone who believes that Jingle Bells is evidence for the historical Jesus.

54. So, while it’s been well-accepted in recent years that Jesus was not BORN on Dec 25th, that he was VISITED BY THE MAGI on Dec 25th makes a lot of sense. And remember, in the traditional story, the Magi are there right after his birth… In other words, there may have been a reason for believing that Jesus was born on the 25th other than that the 25th was already a festive holiday or the beginning of the spring equinox. (And also, how would we explain “White Christmas,” “The Christmas Song,” and “Jingle Bells”?)
Click to expand...

From Messiah - Hot or Not


*Poe?
 
Filippo Lippi said:
Wait....





We are expecting* coherent logic from someone who believes that Jingle Bells is evidence for the historical Jesus.







From Messiah - Hot or Not





*Poe?
Click to expand...



The biblical illiteracy on display in the quote you posted boggles the mind.

If you take the Bible as accurate then Jesus was not born in December. For example, the newborn lambs being kept outside sets his birthdate no later than early November. December was explicitly picked by the church in Rome as a means of absorbing Yule celebrations and other winter solstice celebrations. I’ve read some of the heated discussion that church leaders were having around the time this decision was made. Picking such a biblically absurd date pissed a lot of people off.

Not even all Christian denominations agree upon December 25.

It’s like using Arbor Day to determine the date God created Adam and Eve.
 
godless dave said:
OK? Of course it would have a different personal sense of self awareness - it would be a different body. It would be "different" in exactly the same way the body was different. We would still know which body it was, and thus "who" it was.
Click to expand...
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
 
Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

That difference is the same thing - location and specific molecules. There would be no other difference between the two senses of self awareness.
 
Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

 
Jabba said:
You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different.
Click to expand...

No. That misrepresents materialism.

It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

There is no difference. You simply apply "quotes" and underlining to common words to suggest they have a different meaning that magically conjures up the difference you need for your argument.

You are exactly, blatantly, begging the question.
 
Jabba, in the materialist model, what makes me me is the same thing that makes my body my body - it's made of this matter.
 
Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

Jabba,

Please define, using actual words that convey an actual thought, a "Specific Sense of Personal Awareness."

What is a specific sense of personal awareness exactly?

And I mean define it. That doesn't mean another lie about how we "all experience it" or "What the reincarnationist think" or anything.

In words; nouns and verbs and adjectives, describe or explain to me a "Specific Sense of Personal Awareness."
 
Jabba literally thinks underlining and bolding and putting quotes around a pronoun turns it into a soul.
 
Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules.
Click to expand...
Right, just like a duplicated person in the materialist model.

You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different.
Click to expand...
You won't be allowed to lie about this, Jabba. The materialist model, which is what you're trying to refute, doesn't recognize such an idiotic "difference". Do VW's have a soul because two duplicate VW's would go "different specific 60 mph"? Does calling going 60 mph "specific" imbue it with magic?

Sorry, but you just won't be allowed to lie about materialism.

It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...
Materialism doesn't care what you're equivocating about. You won't be allowed to lie about materialism.

Do as you were instructed.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Jabba literally thinks underlining and bolding and putting quotes around a pronoun turns it into a soul.
Click to expand...

I don't see any other reasonable conclusion. He has already admitted that the concept he's talking about is the soul. He's already admitted that he doesn't just say "soul" because he recognizes that would seem to beg the question. The only conclusion left is that he intends to beg the question, but also to deceive as many people as he can into thinking he isn't. He applies punctuation and other textual apparatus in the hopes that the reader will read into it the soul concept Jabba intends.
 
Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

Jabba, instead of posting all this text, couldn't you just link to the most recent time you said exactly the same thing, before the last fringe reset? That way all we'd need to do is reply with sequential post numbers, because the answers haven't changed either. If we're going to be trapped in an endless loop, at least let's make it efficient.

Dave
 
Jabba,

Clearly, you're not getting any traction here. I would like to suggest a change of venue for you, to regions where you'll get feedback more to your liking. Please call into the Distorted View Voicemail line at 206-666-4463 and summarize your ideas. I think the podcast host will be happy to interview you on his show. It's an audio podcast so you don't even need to dress up to be featured.
 
godless dave said:
OK? Of course it would have a different personal sense of self awareness - it would be a different body. It would be "different" in exactly the same way the body was different. We would still know which body it was, and thus "who" it was.
Click to expand...

Jabba said:
- The only differences between a VW and its perfect copy would be location and specific molecules. You and your copy would have another difference -- your specific senses of personal awareness would be different. It is this difference that constitutes the "who" I'm trying to talk about.
Click to expand...

godless dave said:
That difference is the same thing - location and specific molecules. There would be no other difference between the two senses of self awareness.
Click to expand...
- The sense of self-awareness may be the result of different location and molecules, but the VW has no sense of self-awareness nor analogous result.
 
Jabba said:
- The sense of self-awareness may be the result of different location and molecules, but the VW has no sense of self-awareness nor analogous result.
Click to expand...

So what?

The car still exists without a soul.

Unless of course you're proposing something like this:



Or this:

 
Jabba said:
The sense of self-awareness may be the result of different location and molecules...
Click to expand...

No, that's not how materialism works. Emergent properties don't suddenly disappear or become radically different if identical material is in a different place.

...but the VW has no sense of self-awareness nor analogous result.
Click to expand...

Special pleading. All the emergent properties of a Volkswagen will be reproduced if you reproduce the material. Similarly all the emergent properties of a human will be reproduced if you reproduce the material. That's the central tenet of materialism. There's nothing in materialism that requires properties of one kind of object to be identical or analogous to those of another kind in order for that tenet to hold. You're begging the notion that the sense of self-awareness is not a property.

As usual, you're inventing your own rules and trying to call it materialism.
 
Jabba said:
- The sense of self-awareness may be the result of different location and molecules, but the VW has no sense of self-awareness nor analogous result.
Click to expand...

It has other emergent properties. You're special pleading again.

In what way is the sense of self different from other emergent properties?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom