Smart Kid

[cyborg]

Asking why M&Ms don't evolve is a bit like asking why you can't use your fork to fly.

 

[rcronk]

We covered the details about this in the thread above. If you can't find it, let me know and I'll explain further.

 

[Hokulele]

Hokulele - Thanks for the scripture references. I'm not sure I'd be able to take those verses into a (non-crooked) court and convince people that a heliocentric theory was heretical - the verses are pretty vague. That's one thing that bugs me about people is that they do their own junk in the name of religion and thereby give religion a bad wrap. If people could get their own answers and not follow or compel each other - that would be nice.

Thanks for the response. Just to clarify my point with the biblical quotes, at the time, they were not considered vague at all. For example, I gave the Ecclesiastes quote in context with the following verses to show that the author of the verse meant it in a true literal fashion. It is all about cycles, and it was assumed that the reader would understand that the sun literally moved across the sky (rather than the earth rotating, as we know now), then returned back to its starting place, much as the river literally runs into the sea.

It is easy to dismiss such writing as vague or metaphorical based on what we know now, but that is reinterpreting the words, rather than reinterpreting the science, which is what you had mentioned in your post here, (the bit about trusting god before trusting science).

I have no problem with faith in general, but when it starts to obscure observable facts (such as heliocentrism or evolution), then I start to become alarmed.

 

[rcronk]

Fair enough.

 

[Shevek-72]

3. Pray to ask God if the contents of the book you just read are true. This can be a simple prayer similar to "God, I just read this book and it says you exist and I want to know if you exist and if this book is true.".

I did that some years ago. And I got an answer from God right away. It was: "You are a stupid [rule 8]. It should be clear to you that I do not exist. Now bugger off".
Don't understand why you got a different statement.

 

[rcronk]

lol - So God does exist, He's just a lot more rude and a little less honest than He's described in scripture! Cool!

 

[cyborg]

We covered the details about this in the thread above.

You do realise of course that posting this information changed the thread order?

 

[Shevek-72]

lol - So God does exist [...]

So you're calling God a liar?

 

[Hokulele]

Fair enough.

 

[rcronk]

cyborg - Oh, sorry - I meant "earlier in this very thread" not in the thread above this thread.

shevek-72 - Well, either he's lying or you are, and since I don't know you I guess it could be you that's lying. But at least it's a funny lie.

 

[cyborg]

cyborg - Oh, sorry - I meant "earlier in this very thread" not in the thread above this thread.

Then why assume I wasn't aware that there was previous discussion rather than that I had a desire to post a short analogy on the topic?

 

[rcronk]

Since your analogy missed the point of the discussion, I assumed you had not read the discussion. I apologize for assuming.

 

[Tony]

Tony - Good points, let me clarify. I was looking for what causes something to be living or not living and in theism, a spirit is usually what people believe is at the source of what's moving the body about and is at the source of thought, etc. I was looking for the atheist point of view on these things.

With all due respect, the theist view, that, as you describe it, the spirit is the source that gives life, is demonstrably wrong. Don't believe me? See what happens when you stop breathing, eating and drinking. Your body doesn't need a spirit to move and think, it needs food, water and oxygen. This is a scientific fact.

 

[Shevek-72]

shevek-72 - Well, either he's lying or you are, and since I don't know you I guess it could be you that's lying. But at least it's a funny lie.

I'd say you are skipping at least one of the possibitities here. I agree that God probably was not lying - I mean why should he lie to me when I was praying with a sincere heart and with real intend? No. I am totally convinced that God told me the TRUTH. He does not exist.
But how can I trust you, I don't know you and you tell me of your experiences with God that are so different from my own. I think you might not be telling the truth here... If only I could think of a way to falsify these contradicting claims and find out the truth....

 

[rcronk]

Tony - Perhaps a person needs a spirit and food and water and air to keep living. I don't think denying a person of a subset of its needs and having it then die proves that there aren't other needs. Apparently if a body is starved or injured, there is a rule that the spirit leaves the body and that person's time here on earth is over. I don't think your point proves that a spirit does not exist and is not at the source of thought and choice, etc.

Shevek - m-kay.

 

[Ryokan]

Tony - Perhaps a person needs a spirit and food and water and air to keep living. I don't think denying a person of a subset of its needs and having it then die proves that there aren't other needs. Apparently if a body is starved or injured, there is a rule that the spirit leaves the body and that person's time here on earth is over. I don't think your point proves that a spirit does not exist and is not at the source of thought and choice, etc.

The question then becomes, how would you recognize a body with spirit and one without one?

 

[Tony]

Tony - Perhaps a person needs a spirit and food and water and air to keep living.

You first need to prove the existance of a spirit if you're going to answer the question of whether it's needed to survive.

I don't think denying a person of a subset of its needs and having it then die proves that there aren't other needs.

You did ask for the source of what moves life. It's a fact that if you deny those things to a living being, it will die. What other conclusion can you draw from that other than those things are needed to survive?

Apparently if a body is starved or injured, there is a rule that the spirit leaves the body and that person's time here on earth is over.

First prove that a spirit exists. Furthmore, since there is a "rule" that the spirit must leave the body in the event of starvation of injury, it would follow that it's not the spirit that animates the body.

I don't think your point proves that a spirit does not exist

It's not my job to prove a spirit doesn't exist anymore than it's my job to prove that unicorns don't exist. It's you, the person making the claim, that must show that the spirit exists.

and is not at the source of thought and choice

Actually, it does, you just don't like it. If you have faith that it's your spirit that gives you life, you should be prepared to test it. Don't eat, sleep, drink or breath for 4 days, if it's your spirit keeping you alive, you should be ok.

 

[rcronk]

Ryokan - I guess if the body showed signs of life, it would have a spirit and if it didn't show signs of life, it wouldn't have a spirit. String theory has similar difficulties in that it's very difficult to find evidence that the theory is correct. Now, if one follows the experiment I outlined above, they could find out these things that way. I know - we'll have to agree to disagree but I like to be able to use both the scientific method and the "ask God" method together - finding out all I can and then going to Him with the things I can't find on my own.

Tony - ok, let's apply your logic to a subset: try not drinking any water for a week. You then die and we can conclude that it's only water that is needed for life. A need for food doesn't exist. That's how I'm hearing your argument about a spirit. The cool thing is that I don't have to prove to anyone that a spirit exists, I just have to find out for myself. I've done this and it works and I've outlined how anyone can also do it and so it's up to you to chose whether or not you'll try the experiment and open up a whole new way of acquiring knowledge.

 

[Tony]

Tony - ok, let's apply your logic to a subset: try not drinking any water for a week. You then die and we can conclude that it's only water that is needed for life.

That's not my logic at all. You claim it's the spirit, something you're unwilling and unable to show the existence of, that moves life. I'm claiming it's food, water and oxygen, things that are known to exist, that move life. And I'm right.

That's how I'm hearing your argument about a spirit.

Of course you are, you're searching for any hair to split to discount my argument. It's your defense mechanism from having to seriously consider my argument.

The cool thing is that I don't have to prove to anyone that a spirit exists

If you want your claims to be taken serously you do.

I've done this and it works

No, you haven't. You just believe you have.

and I've outlined how anyone can also do it and so it's up to you to chose whether or not you'll try the experiment and open up a whole new way of acquiring knowledge.

I already have any found it wanting.

 

[KingMerv00]

Deleted. My post was way too late to take seriously.