Is man a spiritual being?

[Taz]

I never called myself a winner, you made that up. I simply asked you to explain yourself and all I get now is a lot of tap dancing.

What do you call it when you are the one saying, "I win"? I was wondering by the way what is it you think you have won by trying to deny someone else their faith in God?

I'm not looking to "win", just to explore whether what you're saying has any truth to it (it doesn't). Maybe after talking with me, you simply feel like a loser?

Your exploration of my limited testimony, and your disbelief is noted, and it is not a loss to me as your path is not the same as mine.

Nothing you have said so far proves a god. It's personal wishful thinking. I guess there's nothing wrong with that, other than you live in a bit of a fantasy world. But you seem ok with that.

It is not necessary for me to "proves a god" to someone devoid of the knowledge of the spirit within them as it is not my purpose, nor my duty, or is it my obligation to do so.

I’m looking at what you’re saying objectively, and you have nothing, really. Anecdotal wishful thinking.

 

[RodISHI]

What do you call it when you are the one saying, "I win"? I was wondering by the way what is it you think you have won by trying to deny someone else their faith in God?

I'm not looking to "win", just to explore whether what you're saying has any truth to it (it doesn't). Maybe after talking with me, you simply feel like a loser?

Your exploration of my limited testimony, and your disbelief is noted, and it is not a loss to me as your path is not the same as mine.

Nothing you have said so far proves a god. It's personal wishful thinking. I guess there's nothing wrong with that, other than you live in a bit of a fantasy world. But you seem ok with that.

It is not necessary for me to "proves a god" to someone devoid of the knowledge of the spirit within them as it is not my purpose, nor my duty, or is it my obligation to do so.

I’m looking at what you’re saying objectively, and you have nothing, really. Anecdotal wishful thinking.

In your limited world view I can understand why you think that. Press on but you may want to watch out for mud holes because some of them are really slimy.

 

[sealybobo]

lol...


What I am actually doing is showing the only rational way to interpret the fantastical claims of scripture that conforms to and is confirmed by reality, the only rational way to interpret the irrational things that Christians already profess to believe, the only rational way to interpret the nutty things that Jesus said, the only rational way to understand and conform to divine law that fulfills the promise of life.

In the process the antichrist, unleashed on the world in 325 c.e. by Rome, will be completely destroyed.

You got a problem with that?

You are making a critical theory argument. You are stating what you believe it isn’t. Not what you believe it is. If you were to state what you believe it is, then you would reveal exactly what I have been saying. You are a militant atheist Jew.

How can I have a problem? I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.

OK, let me get this straight. I show you how what you profess to believe is in error and then show you what is right regarding the subjects of miracles, the virgin birth, the resurrection, divine law etc. I show you how eucharistic adoration is idolatry, I show you how bread from heaven became flesh, a metaphor for teaching from God which is the actual body of Christ.

And you act like I have never stated my beliefs? All you have to say for yourself is that I am a militant atheist Jew.

You can do all things through Christ who strengthens you ? When is he going to help you to be honest?

A matzo is your source of spiritual life because you have faith and I don't? Really? You're a spiritual person?

You're not not just a liar?

That is correct. You don’t have beliefs. You have arguments against my beliefs. It’s your mission.

Well when you come at us with your unfounded beliefs we can either believe too, doubt you or spear you like those Indians on those islands speared that missionary who wouldn’t take go away seriously.

I haven't come at you with my beliefs, sealybobo. You are here seeking out my beliefs.

The only ones being speared are you guys. I keep wondering when you will have enough.

Merry Xmas to

 

[sealybobo]

You'd have to actually watch it first before you could logically dismiss it. The time stamps prove you never actually watched it. It's a 45 minute long discussion by a world renowned physicist to a room full of world renowned physicists.

You would actually have to be silly to suggest a YouTube video is a comprehensive consensus on science.

We’re still left with nothing in your long cutting and pasting that offers any suggestion that the gods had any supernatural hand in existence.

The Discovery Institute or perhaps some other of the fundamentalist creation ministries may have some YouTube videos.

Thrill us, won’t you?

You would actually have had to watch it to know it is the comprehensive consensus on science. But let me offer you another expert testimony that it is a comprehensive consensus in science....

Today – even before Monday’s revelations – you’d be hard-pressed to find a scientist who disputed the Big Bang theory; it’s the only one that makes scientific sense, said Professor Tsvi Piran, Schwartzmann University Chair at Hebrew University’s Racah Institute of Physics.

New Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

There are only two possibilities. Either spirit created the material world or spirit did not create the material world. If spirit did not create the material world you will have a hard time proving that matter and energy existed before space and time. If spirit created the material world, that problem goes away. Why? Because it is not possible for matter and energy to exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. The only thing which can be eternal and unchanging is no thing. As in no material thing. So logic informs our answers and since the material world was created following the laws of nature (also something which is no thing) the best answer, however hard it is for you to swallow, is that the material world was created by spirit.

I don’t think appeals to spirit worlds, supernaturalism and other things that go bump in the night are really helpful.

That fear of the unknown served us well when tigers and bears were hunting us while we slept. It comforted everyone to know grandmother was going to join granddaddy

Unfortunately the data doesn't suggest spirituality is going away, Sealybobo. People retain their spirituality because we were made for spirituality and because spirituality has a functional advantage. If it were as you say, spirituality would have died out. That's not what the data shows. The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality. They don't leave religion and become atheists. Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages.

You do realize that the two components of natural selection are functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation, right?

I really enjoy these conversations because the lack of logic employed by you guys serves as a contrast.

We see the more we evolve the less religious we get because it’s a ridiculous superstition for the weak minded.

That’s why the most religious are the most dumb. Muslims, Bible belters, global warming deniers

 

[sealybobo]

You would actually have to be silly to suggest a YouTube video is a comprehensive consensus on science.

We’re still left with nothing in your long cutting and pasting that offers any suggestion that the gods had any supernatural hand in existence.

The Discovery Institute or perhaps some other of the fundamentalist creation ministries may have some YouTube videos.

Thrill us, won’t you?

You would actually have had to watch it to know it is the comprehensive consensus on science. But let me offer you another expert testimony that it is a comprehensive consensus in science....

Today – even before Monday’s revelations – you’d be hard-pressed to find a scientist who disputed the Big Bang theory; it’s the only one that makes scientific sense, said Professor Tsvi Piran, Schwartzmann University Chair at Hebrew University’s Racah Institute of Physics.

New Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

There are only two possibilities. Either spirit created the material world or spirit did not create the material world. If spirit did not create the material world you will have a hard time proving that matter and energy existed before space and time. If spirit created the material world, that problem goes away. Why? Because it is not possible for matter and energy to exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. The only thing which can be eternal and unchanging is no thing. As in no material thing. So logic informs our answers and since the material world was created following the laws of nature (also something which is no thing) the best answer, however hard it is for you to swallow, is that the material world was created by spirit.

I don’t think appeals to spirit worlds, supernaturalism and other things that go bump in the night are really helpful.

That fear of the unknown served us well when tigers and bears were hunting us while we slept. It comforted everyone to know grandmother was going to join granddaddy

Unfortunately the data doesn't suggest spirituality is going away, Sealybobo. People retain their spirituality because we were made for spirituality and because spirituality has a functional advantage. If it were as you say, spirituality would have died out. That's not what the data shows. The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality. They don't leave religion and become atheists. Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages.

You do realize that the two components of natural selection are functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation, right?

I really enjoy these conversations because the lack of logic employed by you guys serves as a contrast.

Your “…. Because I say so” arguments are comedy gold. If, as you claim, “spirituality has a functional advantage”, I would have thought you could have supported that statement. But of course you did not. What “functional advantage” does spirituality offer?

I think that the problem most people have with rationality (as opposed to mysticism and belief in spirit worlds), is that they perceive that it doesn't address human intangible issues such as emotions, hence they feel reason is somehow inadequate. I take a very different view. Stripped of reason, one cannot even perceive the concept of love or hate or compassion, so therefore, the keystone of our perception of existence *must* be reason. I believe that mankind will continue to peel back the layers of mystery that enshrouds us, and I believe that he can only do so using his rationality. To purport an "incomprensible" Being means that you have a guaranteed method of making the Universe exactly that: incomprehensible. Ultimately, I think it very possible that our intellect will afford us the chance to peer into the very fabric of existence.

It’s remarkable how you singlehandedly refute your own comments. Another of your “…. Because I say so” gems is that “Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages”. Yet, in the same paragraph you acknowledge that “The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality”. As usual, you supply no data, just “…. Because I say so”.

So much of the above is characteristic of a child who has not developed the cognitive skills to make choices and come to rational conclusions. Can someone sweep away facts and evidence when they are counter to the faith? Yes. You can. But you know what? That is symptomatic of what a delusional person does. But wait, it gets worse-- because to rationalize irrationality because it meets some arbitrary standard one holds is an utter lack of accepting responsibility for what the ideology teaches. Trying to force the conclusion of an argument to contradict the evidence really dismantles the theism.

I don't understand the enjoyment you get in these conversations when your arguments self-refute.

Fuck n A Hollie you nailed it.

He thinks he’s so clever but every argument he makes that he thinks proves a god exists, like the idea that people have always been spiritual and will always be spiritual, all of them are fatally flawed. But every flaw you bring up he spins that into an entire new thread.

It doesn’t matter to him we are losing our spirituality. In fact it’s happening very fast compared to how evolution works. Another thing he doesn’t believe.

Ding, you’re a very clever retard.

 

[ding]

You would actually have to be silly to suggest a YouTube video is a comprehensive consensus on science.

We’re still left with nothing in your long cutting and pasting that offers any suggestion that the gods had any supernatural hand in existence.

The Discovery Institute or perhaps some other of the fundamentalist creation ministries may have some YouTube videos.

Thrill us, won’t you?

You would actually have had to watch it to know it is the comprehensive consensus on science. But let me offer you another expert testimony that it is a comprehensive consensus in science....

Today – even before Monday’s revelations – you’d be hard-pressed to find a scientist who disputed the Big Bang theory; it’s the only one that makes scientific sense, said Professor Tsvi Piran, Schwartzmann University Chair at Hebrew University’s Racah Institute of Physics.

New Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

There are only two possibilities. Either spirit created the material world or spirit did not create the material world. If spirit did not create the material world you will have a hard time proving that matter and energy existed before space and time. If spirit created the material world, that problem goes away. Why? Because it is not possible for matter and energy to exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. The only thing which can be eternal and unchanging is no thing. As in no material thing. So logic informs our answers and since the material world was created following the laws of nature (also something which is no thing) the best answer, however hard it is for you to swallow, is that the material world was created by spirit.

I don’t think appeals to spirit worlds, supernaturalism and other things that go bump in the night are really helpful.

That fear of the unknown served us well when tigers and bears were hunting us while we slept. It comforted everyone to know grandmother was going to join granddaddy

Unfortunately the data doesn't suggest spirituality is going away, Sealybobo. People retain their spirituality because we were made for spirituality and because spirituality has a functional advantage. If it were as you say, spirituality would have died out. That's not what the data shows. The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality. They don't leave religion and become atheists. Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages.

You do realize that the two components of natural selection are functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation, right?

I really enjoy these conversations because the lack of logic employed by you guys serves as a contrast.

Your “…. Because I say so” arguments are comedy gold. If, as you claim, “spirituality has a functional advantage”, I would have thought you could have supported that statement. But of course you did not. What “functional advantage” does spirituality offer?

I think that the problem most people have with rationality (as opposed to mysticism and belief in spirit worlds), is that they perceive that it doesn't address human intangible issues such as emotions, hence they feel reason is somehow inadequate. I take a very different view. Stripped of reason, one cannot even perceive the concept of love or hate or compassion, so therefore, the keystone of our perception of existence *must* be reason. I believe that mankind will continue to peel back the layers of mystery that enshrouds us, and I believe that he can only do so using his rationality. To purport an "incomprensible" Being means that you have a guaranteed method of making the Universe exactly that: incomprehensible. Ultimately, I think it very possible that our intellect will afford us the chance to peer into the very fabric of existence.

It’s remarkable how you singlehandedly refute your own comments. Another of your “…. Because I say so” gems is that “Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages”. Yet, in the same paragraph you acknowledge that “The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality”. As usual, you supply no data, just “…. Because I say so”.

So much of the above is characteristic of a child who has not developed the cognitive skills to make choices and come to rational conclusions. Can someone sweep away facts and evidence when they are counter to the faith? Yes. You can. But you know what? That is symptomatic of what a delusional person does. But wait, it gets worse-- because to rationalize irrationality because it meets some arbitrary standard one holds is an utter lack of accepting responsibility for what the ideology teaches. Trying to force the conclusion of an argument to contradict the evidence really dismantles the theism.

I don't understand the enjoyment you get in these conversations when your arguments self-refute.

I am more than happy to let what I wrote stand as is, Hollie.

 

[sealybobo]

You would actually have to be silly to suggest a YouTube video is a comprehensive consensus on science.

We’re still left with nothing in your long cutting and pasting that offers any suggestion that the gods had any supernatural hand in existence.

The Discovery Institute or perhaps some other of the fundamentalist creation ministries may have some YouTube videos.

Thrill us, won’t you?

You would actually have had to watch it to know it is the comprehensive consensus on science. But let me offer you another expert testimony that it is a comprehensive consensus in science....

Today – even before Monday’s revelations – you’d be hard-pressed to find a scientist who disputed the Big Bang theory; it’s the only one that makes scientific sense, said Professor Tsvi Piran, Schwartzmann University Chair at Hebrew University’s Racah Institute of Physics.

New Big Bang evidence supports Biblical creation, says Orthodox physicist

There are only two possibilities. Either spirit created the material world or spirit did not create the material world. If spirit did not create the material world you will have a hard time proving that matter and energy existed before space and time. If spirit created the material world, that problem goes away. Why? Because it is not possible for matter and energy to exist forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. The only thing which can be eternal and unchanging is no thing. As in no material thing. So logic informs our answers and since the material world was created following the laws of nature (also something which is no thing) the best answer, however hard it is for you to swallow, is that the material world was created by spirit.

I don’t think appeals to spirit worlds, supernaturalism and other things that go bump in the night are really helpful.

That fear of the unknown served us well when tigers and bears were hunting us while we slept. It comforted everyone to know grandmother was going to join granddaddy

Unfortunately the data doesn't suggest spirituality is going away, Sealybobo. People retain their spirituality because we were made for spirituality and because spirituality has a functional advantage. If it were as you say, spirituality would have died out. That's not what the data shows. The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality. They don't leave religion and become atheists. Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages.

You do realize that the two components of natural selection are functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation, right?

I really enjoy these conversations because the lack of logic employed by you guys serves as a contrast.

Your “…. Because I say so” arguments are comedy gold. If, as you claim, “spirituality has a functional advantage”, I would have thought you could have supported that statement. But of course you did not. What “functional advantage” does spirituality offer?

I think that the problem most people have with rationality (as opposed to mysticism and belief in spirit worlds), is that they perceive that it doesn't address human intangible issues such as emotions, hence they feel reason is somehow inadequate. I take a very different view. Stripped of reason, one cannot even perceive the concept of love or hate or compassion, so therefore, the keystone of our perception of existence *must* be reason. I believe that mankind will continue to peel back the layers of mystery that enshrouds us, and I believe that he can only do so using his rationality. To purport an "incomprensible" Being means that you have a guaranteed method of making the Universe exactly that: incomprehensible. Ultimately, I think it very possible that our intellect will afford us the chance to peer into the very fabric of existence.

It’s remarkable how you singlehandedly refute your own comments. Another of your “…. Because I say so” gems is that “Atheism is an intellectual dead end which offers no functional advantages”. Yet, in the same paragraph you acknowledge that “The data shows that people are turning away from organized religion but are retaining their spirituality”. As usual, you supply no data, just “…. Because I say so”.

So much of the above is characteristic of a child who has not developed the cognitive skills to make choices and come to rational conclusions. Can someone sweep away facts and evidence when they are counter to the faith? Yes. You can. But you know what? That is symptomatic of what a delusional person does. But wait, it gets worse-- because to rationalize irrationality because it meets some arbitrary standard one holds is an utter lack of accepting responsibility for what the ideology teaches. Trying to force the conclusion of an argument to contradict the evidence really dismantles the theism.

I don't understand the enjoyment you get in these conversations when your arguments self-refute.

So, today my dad took me to the cemetery to see my mom. He runs into this woman from Lebanon who lost her son in a car crash. My dad starts talking to her about one day seeing him again and she says she not sure about all that stuff. I so wanted to say good for you lady.

It is so clearly wishful thinking. There is nothing on earth that suggests an afterlife. Religions and the religious want us to allow them to suspend reality. Ding doesn’t try to make us feel guilty or bad for pointing out that we are being mean for doing it. I think he understands we believe religion is more harmful than it is beneficial. It’s best left in the closet or to yourself. If your family is into brainwashing your kids don’t expect the public to go along. Expect to be challenged. And if your story is that strong you shouldn’t mind being challenged. It’s what scientific seculars behave. There’s more of us than they know.

Do you think that woman would dare doubt the Koran out loud in Lebanon? I wonder if she would be stoned for it.

The number of people who are spiritual only proves how primitive we still are imo.

And just because we have always believed doesn’t mean we always will. Some men will always hope for an afterlife but future man will understand no god has ever visited. So fine to be spiritual. Being religious is just being stupid. Willful ignorance even if your parents brainwashed you from birth.

Heaven is wishful thinking and probably will never completely go away. Hell even I hope I’m wrong about there being a heaven. I’m certain you don’t have to be a Christian to get in but I hope I see my mom again.

 

[sealybobo]

^ dunning effect

I do hope one day I see my mom again. Does that make me spiritual?

 

[ding]

^ dunning effect

I do hope one day I see my mom again. Does that make me spiritual?

I don’t know. I’d explain the beliefs of why we pray for the dead that “your” catholic faith teaches, but some things you have to do for yourself.

 

[sealybobo]

^ dunning effect

I do hope one day I see my mom again. Does that make me spiritual?

I don’t know. I’d explain the beliefs of why we pray for the dead that “your” catholic faith teaches, but some things you have to do for yourself.

I don’t mind people believing in things they don’t understand I do it too. GW, evolution, partial birth abortions,

 

[ding]

Science is the study of nature to discover the order within nature so as to be able to make predictions about the order of nature.

It is because of the things I have learned from science that I believe there is a reality outside of space and time.

But it is the spirit inside of everyone that confirms it.

 

[ding]

^ dunning effect

I do hope one day I see my mom again. Does that make me spiritual?

I don’t know. I’d explain the beliefs of why we pray for the dead that “your” catholic faith teaches, but some things you have to do for yourself.

I don’t mind people believing in things they don’t understand I do it too. GW, evolution, partial birth abortions,

Those sound like really comforting things to believe in.

 

[ding]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

 

[sealybobo]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

 

[ding]

Every time I read one of Hollie’s posts I think to myself, how is it possible that the world doesn’t love the Jews.

The truth hurts.

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

The Gospel of Thomas, one of I think 45 or so books which 1st century tyrants in the Church purposely omitted is a great book to read on the topic, I'd encourage anyone with a background in the natural sciences to read it and absorb it for what it is.

 

[ding]

Yes, usually before it helps. We are all receiving constant feedback back from the universe. This ought to raise your suspicion.

The Gospel of Thomas, one of I think 45 or so books which 1st century tyrants in the Church purposely omitted is a great book to read on the topic, I'd encourage anyone with a background in the natural sciences to read it and absorb it for what it is.

1st century tyrants?

 

[Natural Citizen]

1st century tyrants?

The 1st century Bishops who omitted the critical aspects of the Word before proceeding to twist the aspects of the Word they chose to include for their own benefit.

What's worse is that they created their own form of Latin so that nobody they were preaching to would understand that they were twisting the Word for their own benefit.

 

[ding]

1st century tyrants?

The 1st century Bishops who omitted the critical aspects of the Word before proceeding to twist the aspects of the Word they chose to include for their own benefit.

What's worse is that they created their own form of Latin so that nobody they were preaching to would understand that they were twisting the Word for their own benefit.

I’d like to read more about this. Is there a link you can provide?

 

[Natural Citizen]

I’d like to read more about this. Is there a link you can provide?

Gosh, ding, what I mentioned here just in passing has been learned from years of reading. In fact, I almost refrained from even mentioning anything about it based on that alone.

The best place for that kind of information rests in the national libraries of other countries, mostly European nations. Here's where we get into true Bible study, unlike what many see as Bible study in just reading the varying modern translations of it/them. It's a different kind of Bible study.

I'll look around for you and see what I can find from past reading on it. I may have saved some of the national archives on my other computer some place.

I spent about a year off and on studying linguistics in order to compare different biblic texts from around the world and that's how I eventually found some of those old writings, quite by chance. You know, we're 6 linguistics separated from that time.

But yeah, I'll poke around and find what I have saved from when I was doing that. Actually, I'm positive I still have some of the material some place now that I'm reminded of it.