I personally think we are all born with a wonder in our consciousness. Something that tells us that our reality might not be as what it seems, that there may be something mysterious and unexplained in our consciousness.. Something beyond our reasoning...
And we see this manifesting in peoples thoughts all the time... There are sooo many claims (even scientific claims) that go beyond our reasoning.. Like mind over matter, or infinite parallel universes, multiverses, aliens, ghosts, the afterlife, telekinesis, out of body experiences, past lives, the "matrix", mysticism, sorcery, magic, etc... We see people, who honestly wonder about the possibilities of many of these things, perhaps all of us have had these kinds of thoughts amusing the unexplained...
I mean even science, and scientist, and even atheist scientist have amused some of these possibilities, like the multiverse.. The multiverse (something that there is no evidence of) is a theory that came up in a rebuttal against God creating THIS universe... (Ill put a scientific video below that suggest "mind over matter" is a real thing)
But then when we come to the idea of God, all of these wonders turn away and people are certain that God cant exist, that miracle cant happen, that there is no after life, there is no soul, etc.... As soon as God gets into the picture, all these wonders that we are born with contemplating, are trashed as a means of mocking and discrediting anything out of the inexplicable, and everything boils down to cold hard science... This is Scientific Materialism.... This is why David Berlinski (atheist philosopher) says in his book "The Devils Delusion" that "scientific atheism is a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt"... It is this notion that nothing inexplicable exist, that everything is explained, and anything beyond explanation (like God) is mocked...
Its a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt...
To me, this seems like a complete indoctrination of atheism... And is there any proof that there is nothing beyond these cold hard explanations? No... But it is assumed....
So if you play around with any of these thoughts, how come you discredit God automatically? If something like "mind over matter" is true, how can you say the divine is false? (example: video below)...
(Personally i think Christianity explains in perfectly.. 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11)
[youtube][/youtube]
If science cant explain everything.. Scientific Materialism
Moderator: Moderators
-
DeMotts
- Scholar
- Posts: 276
- Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 1:58 pm
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 22 times
Post #41
[Replying to post 40 by Tart]
Tart what is your take on the old testament - all the stories that DrNoGods posted before? I didn't quite understand your clarification. So are those stories, Noah, Jonah, etc. myths or literal?
Tart what is your take on the old testament - all the stories that DrNoGods posted before? I didn't quite understand your clarification. So are those stories, Noah, Jonah, etc. myths or literal?
Post #42
Well we dont have the same kind of clarity for these stories as we do for Jesus and him as the Messiah. The kind of testimony to tell us definitively that these events happened exactly like what is written. It is an indisputable fact that there are many things in the Scripture that are parables and allegorical teachings, just as it is a fact that there is historical aspects as well.. My personal opinion is open to change about that of Adam and Eve, Noah, the Tower of Babel, etc... But I personally think, from my studies, that the Old Testament can be shown to have historical value precisely after the flood of Noah, in Genesis 10. I think we could (or should) all agree that there is at least some historical value when naming the kingdoms of the earth, in Genesis 10.. And its likely that the Hebrew language, or the Semites language spawned around this time (which is when the Tower of Babel is told)..DeMotts wrote: [Replying to post 40 by Tart]
Tart what is your take on the old testament - all the stories that DrNoGods posted before? I didn't quite understand your clarification. So are those stories, Noah, Jonah, etc. myths or literal?
I take a realist approach to the Old Testament. The story of Adam and Eve would have had to be either passed down by word of mouth, or inspired by Moses (or someone like him)... That Noah's flood, may be fictional, allegorical, or perhaps (in some kind of sense) historical.... There is just no clear way of interpretation, as far as im concerned.
I do however think even these stories have great exploratory value... That of Adam and Eve, and the Tree of Knowledge, also called the Tree of Consciousness... This may very well be inspired to help explain our consciousness, our sins and our struggles... Or that after the flood could have explanatory value as well, like accounting for all the kingdoms around the world. The tower of Babel may likewise have explanatory value for our understanding of languages...
But my belief is rested on Jesus. Which I personally think is the strongest piece of evidence of an All Knowing, and All Powerful God, who can sway destiny and cause miracles, to exists...
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #43
[Replying to post 42 by Tart]
Myth is an attempt to explain what is unknown by means of metaphors which may be taken literally by those ignorant of the real.
Tart: "But my belief is rested on Jesus. Which I personally think is the strongest piece of evidence of an All Knowing, and All Powerful God, who can sway destiny and cause miracles, to exists..."
And Jesus, would seem to be, at best, a conflation of one or more real persons with various gods and demi-gods popular in the first century CE Mediterranean world. Christian "belief" is best explained by their "sacred scripture": [font=Serif]"Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see."[/font] --- Hebrews 11:1 NIV
So there it is, set down clearly in the holy inerrant "Word of God": "Faith" is wishful thinking, certainty unsupported by evidence.
.
Myth is an attempt to explain what is unknown by means of metaphors which may be taken literally by those ignorant of the real.
Tart: "But my belief is rested on Jesus. Which I personally think is the strongest piece of evidence of an All Knowing, and All Powerful God, who can sway destiny and cause miracles, to exists..."
And Jesus, would seem to be, at best, a conflation of one or more real persons with various gods and demi-gods popular in the first century CE Mediterranean world. Christian "belief" is best explained by their "sacred scripture": [font=Serif]"Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see."[/font] --- Hebrews 11:1 NIV
So there it is, set down clearly in the holy inerrant "Word of God": "Faith" is wishful thinking, certainty unsupported by evidence.
.
Post #44
TSGracchus wrote: [Replying to post 42 by Tart]
Myth is an attempt to explain what is unknown by means of metaphors which may be taken literally by those ignorant of the real.
Tart: "But my belief is rested on Jesus. Which I personally think is the strongest piece of evidence of an All Knowing, and All Powerful God, who can sway destiny and cause miracles, to exists..."
And Jesus, would seem to be, at best, a conflation of one or more real persons with various gods and demi-gods popular in the first century CE Mediterranean world. Christian "belief" is best explained by their "sacred scripture": [font=Serif]"Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see."[/font] --- Hebrews 11:1 NIV
So there it is, set down clearly in the holy inerrant "Word of God": "Faith" is wishful thinking, certainty unsupported by evidence.
.
Ok, well i have studied the holy inerrant Word of God extensively... So you think Jesus was a created myth out of others... Are you familiar with the content of the New Testament?
Can i start by asking you...
What do you believe, why do you believe it, and do you have evidence?
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #45
[Replying to post 44 by Tart]
"Ok, well i have studied the holy inerrant Word of God extensively... So you think Jesus was a created myth out of others... Are you familiar with the content of the New Testament?"
Moderately, although I have only one college semester studying the "New Testament", I have read several versions, including the Anchor Bible, and a number of commentaries.
"Can i start by asking you...
What do you believe, why do you believe it, and do you have evidence?"
Well, I guess should start with math, including logic, set theory, etc. Reasoning from this basis, I accept as the best explanations of the world I perceive, physics, from quantum theory to cosmology, chemistry, geology, biology, ... in short, the well supported explanations provided by the scientific method, which is based on reproducible observations and predictive utility. Such explanations can and almost certainly will be modified, but some in only minor ways.
Psychology is a subset of biology, and consciousness is simply neuroscience examined in the light of cybernetics. Magic, miracles, deities, demons, leprechauns and ghosts are psychological illusions and delusions arising from defective mentation.
As for evidence, it can be found documented in most university libraries. (Quod vide)
.
"Ok, well i have studied the holy inerrant Word of God extensively... So you think Jesus was a created myth out of others... Are you familiar with the content of the New Testament?"
Moderately, although I have only one college semester studying the "New Testament", I have read several versions, including the Anchor Bible, and a number of commentaries.
"Can i start by asking you...
What do you believe, why do you believe it, and do you have evidence?"
Well, I guess should start with math, including logic, set theory, etc. Reasoning from this basis, I accept as the best explanations of the world I perceive, physics, from quantum theory to cosmology, chemistry, geology, biology, ... in short, the well supported explanations provided by the scientific method, which is based on reproducible observations and predictive utility. Such explanations can and almost certainly will be modified, but some in only minor ways.
Psychology is a subset of biology, and consciousness is simply neuroscience examined in the light of cybernetics. Magic, miracles, deities, demons, leprechauns and ghosts are psychological illusions and delusions arising from defective mentation.
As for evidence, it can be found documented in most university libraries. (Quod vide)
.
Post #46
Well i was talking about Jesus Christ, and Christianity... Science is certainly a subject we could talk about, but you made some specific claims saying Jesus is "at best, a conflation of one or more real persons with various gods and demi-gods popular in the first century"... Should we just drop this as an unsupported assertion and move on?TSGracchus wrote: [Replying to post 44 by Tart]
"Ok, well i have studied the holy inerrant Word of God extensively... So you think Jesus was a created myth out of others... Are you familiar with the content of the New Testament?"
Moderately, although I have only one college semester studying the "New Testament", I have read several versions, including the Anchor Bible, and a number of commentaries.
"Can i start by asking you...
What do you believe, why do you believe it, and do you have evidence?"
Well, I guess should start with math, including logic, set theory, etc. Reasoning from this basis, I accept as the best explanations of the world I perceive, physics, from quantum theory to cosmology, chemistry, geology, biology, ... in short, the well supported explanations provided by the scientific method, which is based on reproducible observations and predictive utility. Such explanations can and almost certainly will be modified, but some in only minor ways.
Psychology is a subset of biology, and consciousness is simply neuroscience examined in the light of cybernetics. Magic, miracles, deities, demons, leprechauns and ghosts are psychological illusions and delusions arising from defective mentation.
As for evidence, it can be found documented in most university libraries. (Quod vide)
.
Re: If science cant explain everything.. Scientific Material
Post #47[Replying to post 39 by bluethread]
I did want to respond to this post. I agree, the debate usually should stay on topic, however sometimes is just goes. I am always ready to discuss the foundations of salvation. So, it is what it is.
I did want to respond to this post. I agree, the debate usually should stay on topic, however sometimes is just goes. I am always ready to discuss the foundations of salvation. So, it is what it is.
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #48
[Replying to post 46 by Tart]
There is some support for my position:
"Lost Christianities
[font=Serif]Bart D. Ehrman
Oxford University Press, USA, Oct 2, 2003 - Religion - 320 pages
14 Reviews
The early Christian Church was a chaos of contending beliefs. Some groups of Christians claimed that there was not one God but two or twelve or thirty. Some believed that the world had not been created by God but by a lesser, ignorant deity. Certain sects maintained that Jesus was human but not divine, while others said he was divine but not human.In Lost Christianities, Bart D. Ehrman offers a fascinating look at these early forms of Christianity and shows how they came to be suppressed, reformed, or forgotten. All of these groups insisted that they upheld the teachings of Jesus and his apostles, and they all possessed writings that bore out their claims, books reputedly produced by Jesus's own followers. Modern archaeological work has recovered a number of key texts, and as Ehrman shows, these spectacular discoveries reveal religious diversity that says much about the ways in which history gets written by the winners. Ehrman's discussion ranges from considerations of various "lost scriptures"--including forged gospels supposedly written by Simon Peter, Jesus's closest disciple, and Judas Thomas, Jesus's alleged twin brother--to the disparate beliefs of such groups as the Jewish-Christian Ebionites, the anti-Jewish Marcionites, and various "Gnostic" sects. Ehrman examines in depth the battles that raged between "proto-orthodox Christians"-- those who eventually compiled the canonical books of the New Testament and standardized Christian belief--and the groups they denounced as heretics and ultimately overcame.Scrupulously researched and lucidly written, Lost Christianities is an eye-opening account of politics, power, and the clash of ideas among Christians in the decades before one group came to see its views prevail."[/font] --- https://books.google.com/books/about/Lo ... escription
Extensive citations to the original literature are found in the back of the book.
And please note, my position does not require the any magical, miraculous, or "spiritual" excuses, explanations and apologetics. We see, historically, (Hysterically!
) numerous sects and cults replaced by the establishment of an official governmental religion, imposing a temporary and largely artificial official unity on doctrine and ritual practices, followed by a sometimes violent return to divisiveness, which process continues to this day. This tendency to schism is not exclusive to Christianity of course, and we see the same tendencies in Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. Hinduism is actually a potpourri of cults and sects, united only by the threat of other religions.
.
There is some support for my position:
"Lost Christianities
[font=Serif]Bart D. Ehrman
Oxford University Press, USA, Oct 2, 2003 - Religion - 320 pages
14 Reviews
The early Christian Church was a chaos of contending beliefs. Some groups of Christians claimed that there was not one God but two or twelve or thirty. Some believed that the world had not been created by God but by a lesser, ignorant deity. Certain sects maintained that Jesus was human but not divine, while others said he was divine but not human.In Lost Christianities, Bart D. Ehrman offers a fascinating look at these early forms of Christianity and shows how they came to be suppressed, reformed, or forgotten. All of these groups insisted that they upheld the teachings of Jesus and his apostles, and they all possessed writings that bore out their claims, books reputedly produced by Jesus's own followers. Modern archaeological work has recovered a number of key texts, and as Ehrman shows, these spectacular discoveries reveal religious diversity that says much about the ways in which history gets written by the winners. Ehrman's discussion ranges from considerations of various "lost scriptures"--including forged gospels supposedly written by Simon Peter, Jesus's closest disciple, and Judas Thomas, Jesus's alleged twin brother--to the disparate beliefs of such groups as the Jewish-Christian Ebionites, the anti-Jewish Marcionites, and various "Gnostic" sects. Ehrman examines in depth the battles that raged between "proto-orthodox Christians"-- those who eventually compiled the canonical books of the New Testament and standardized Christian belief--and the groups they denounced as heretics and ultimately overcame.Scrupulously researched and lucidly written, Lost Christianities is an eye-opening account of politics, power, and the clash of ideas among Christians in the decades before one group came to see its views prevail."[/font] --- https://books.google.com/books/about/Lo ... escription
Extensive citations to the original literature are found in the back of the book.
And please note, my position does not require the any magical, miraculous, or "spiritual" excuses, explanations and apologetics. We see, historically, (Hysterically!
) numerous sects and cults replaced by the establishment of an official governmental religion, imposing a temporary and largely artificial official unity on doctrine and ritual practices, followed by a sometimes violent return to divisiveness, which process continues to this day. This tendency to schism is not exclusive to Christianity of course, and we see the same tendencies in Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. Hinduism is actually a potpourri of cults and sects, united only by the threat of other religions..
Post #49
Even though this claim is more on topic:
"Psychology is a subset of biology, and consciousness is simply neuroscience examined in the light of cybernetics. Magic, miracles, deities, demons, leprechauns and ghosts are psychological illusions and delusions arising from defective mentation."
This is basically a scientific materialist claim to know truth... That consousness is nothing more then grey matter fizzing in your brain... Is that how you know "truth"?
"Psychology is a subset of biology, and consciousness is simply neuroscience examined in the light of cybernetics. Magic, miracles, deities, demons, leprechauns and ghosts are psychological illusions and delusions arising from defective mentation."
This is basically a scientific materialist claim to know truth... That consousness is nothing more then grey matter fizzing in your brain... Is that how you know "truth"?
-
TSGracchus
- Scholar
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:06 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #50
[Replying to post 49 by Tart]
Tart: "This is basically a scientific materialist claim to know truth... That consousness (Consciousness?) is nothing more then grey matter fizzing in your brain... Is that how you know 'truth'?"
I do not claim to know truth. I do claim that my admittedly conditional beliefs are based on observation and reason. I've even been known to accept correction!
And, yes, I do use my brain to form my opinions, or more accurately I am my brain forming opinions and reactions based on environment and individual biological processes. What do you use, the entrails of a goat, or just the records of those who did consult the haruspices?
Tart: "This is basically a scientific materialist claim to know truth... That consousness (Consciousness?) is nothing more then grey matter fizzing in your brain... Is that how you know 'truth'?"
I do not claim to know truth. I do claim that my admittedly conditional beliefs are based on observation and reason. I've even been known to accept correction!
And, yes, I do use my brain to form my opinions, or more accurately I am my brain forming opinions and reactions based on environment and individual biological processes. What do you use, the entrails of a goat, or just the records of those who did consult the haruspices?
