Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 13, 2010 - 11:52pm PT
|
It appears the "Greeks" and the "Jews" are running this thread!
|
|
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 12:01am PT
|
I see "excellency of speech or of wisdom", "enticing words of man's wisdom." That sounds as if someone already knows you!
|
|
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 12:11am PT
|
From what I've read in this thread I could comfortably conclude that most users would call "God's Word" foolishness. Is that fair to conclude, Tony, HF, Juan, Wes, PR, Donini, et al non-believers?
|
|
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 01:47am PT
|
I hear ya Crag', just waiting for a response from the rest.
|
|
paul roehl
Boulder climber
california
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 01:56am PT
|
I would never call Christian belief just foolish (absurd) it was the great father of the church, Tertullian, that did that.
As to Christian, religious arguments in general, I'm struck by Tertullian's aphorism, "Credo quia ineptum" (I believe because it is absurd).
The prerequisite of faith is absurdity!
|
|
Jennie
Trad climber
Elk Creek, Idaho
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 02:21am PT
|
Context, context, context.....
Tertullian wrote:
Natus est Dei Filius, non pudet, quia pudendum est;
et mortuus est Dei Filius, prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum est;
et sepultus resurrexit, certum est, quia impossibile.
"The Son of God was born: there is no shame, because it is shameful.
And the Son of God died: it is wholly credible, because it is unsound.
And, buried, He rose again: it is certain, because impossible."
|
|
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 02:28am PT
|
"like it or not, we and our consciousnesses are the products of the natural world. i don't tug at it with the theologies of those who must create a supernatural. natural is wonderful and beautiful to me, i embrace it wholeheartedly, and i see our existences and consciousnesses as a real miracle, something wonderful, to be wondered at and, as is our privilege, approached for understanding."
Tony,
Sounds "enticing", or with "excellence of speech" but I found a concerning contradiction...
MIR'ACLE, n. [L. miraculum, from miror, to wonder.]
1. Literally, a wonder or wonderful thing; but appropriately,
2. In theology, an event or effect contrary to the established constitution and course of things, or a deviation from the known laws of nature; a supernatural event. - Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
That being said, "miracle", on its own, would definitely be out of your character for you to use unless you say "a literal miracle". "Miracle" is what I would expect to see a "Christian" use.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 02:52am PT
|
Paul wrote: "The strangeness and mystery of consciousness are a given, but consciousness is inherently tied to the very structure of its physical generator the brain."
Sorry dood, you done whiffed again. Rather profoundly, I'm afraid. Now you have to go to the corner and put on the pointy hat, for two reasons:
First, you didn't read, or didn't understand the articles, which are not my opinions (I actually disagree with some of them), but those of professionals who work this whole mind and consciousness debate, and two, your quote above is not only harking back to the remedial reductionism, but always posits a kind of "greedy physicalism" where causation runs bottom up, from atomic to complex and finally into "emergent" qualities - and such a causation reflects none of the feedback loops and two-way causation found in the more sophisticated thought on the subject.
Yours is a simple mechanistic approach - a sort of Barny Rubble cosmology that makes sense on a certain level, but is clearly impossible once you start getting some basic chops on how consciousness works and what it is and is not.
And Tony, I fear that you'll have to spend time in the corner as well, for both impudence and density of skull matter. My use of "matter" is a simplified term for this thread referring to something that can be measured by way of scientific experiment. You too seem fixated on the old bottom up causal mode, and the greedy physicalism model, where atomic or chemical processes "produce" the higher function "up" stream.
Perhaps we have to accept and be okay with the notion that subtler investigations of this material, especially those that don't square with Barny Rubble materialism, whereby consciousness is the "result" of a simple stimulus response mechanism (the evolved brain), are simply not being grasped, let along understood, in the first instance.
Again, those articles dismissing material reductionism were not mine, and I thought I made that clear. I simply cited the material as interesting.
For those still struggling and hanging onto to the Rubbleesque material reductionism like a 5.12 lieback, perhaps start with the basics work up as you master the newer and subtler concepts. You might even start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness Not a cutting edge piece, but it presents some of he basics in easy to understand terms.
JL
|
|
Fredrick
Social climber
Ocean City, NJ
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 03:43am PT
|
I've also noted throughout the thread that the "Christians" are, on the most part, trying to convey a warning to the "evolutionists" as opposed to throwing darts, pointing fingers at or condemning the others when they try to answer the questions posed to the them. In my bit of research of the Bible (KJV) I came across the book of John chapter three, verses 17-19 where Jesus says Himself:
"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believe on him is not condemned: but he that believe not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."
Based on this, it's God's word that's condemning you not the "Christians" themselves, whether or not you believe.
Its very easy to take text out of context when trying to communicate via a keyboard for its difficult to express inflection or emphasis with emotion via facial exressions, body language etc. If ANYONE in this thread could teach us how to properly chat via text it would be Mr. Werner Braun for he has lived in this silent world for all his life and uses this as. I would guess as one of his primary tools of communication, ie; TTY/TDD, etc. God blessed you Werner!
|
|
neebee
Social climber
calif/texas
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 03:49am PT
|
hey there fredrick and all, say, just noticed this tonight, and i must say:
as to this quote:
One of his primary tools of communication, ie; TTD, etc
three cheers for the ol' TTD, it is a blessing to many a folks....
oh my, and a big "hey there" to ol' werner, tonight, too...
god bless...
:)
|
|
rrrADAM
climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 07:12am PT
|
rrrADAM- "Christian observation of Sunday come from?"
Because Jesus was raised from the dead on Sunday morning.
No... Not even close. It (why Sunday) isn't hard to find out, if you only look.
But for the relation to Jesus, and even the name of the day "Sunday" will be a bit more difficult, but not too hard, if one only looks.
|
|
rrrADAM
climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 07:32am PT
|
What's troubling here is that because so many have dismissed the Christian view because it 'didn't work' for them for whatever reason, they deem that it must be false.
By your reasoning, any Muslim or Hindu who's belief (just as confident as yours, BTW) "works for them", would be evidence that they are correct, thus you are wrong.
As per your story of Saul/Paul, remember their weren't really "Christians" until well after Paul established the religion, you can also view the prophet Mahamad's "revelation" in the same light as Saul's, or even Joseph Smith's. But see, you [confidently] dismiss as false the personal word of Mohamad and Joseph, yet true the personal word of Saul. (WTF?)
See, the thing is... You confidently dismiss all other beliefs that compete with your own, even if/when they are remarkable similar, and are equally (un)reasonable and (il)logical. This is because you weigh it with confirmation bias.
Your God, as well as the God of the Muslims and the Mormons, are the same... The God of the Jews, as it is their religion all coming from the OT. Even they do not agree with you, yet Xians have hijacked and revised the God of the Jews to suit their own purposes. Note that this was also the God of Jesus, so you don't even have the same God as Jesus.
I know you cannot see the absurdity in this... But see, just as you can see the absurdity of many Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, or Scientology beliefs, ANYONE not inside of your box of dogma can equally see the absurdity in your beliefs.
|
|
rrrADAM
climber
LBMF
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 07:52am PT
|
It is sensible to understand mind consciousness as a product of evolutionary process. It’s functions have provided humanity success in that regard.
The strangeness and mystery of consciousness are a given, but consciousness is inherently tied to the very structure of its physical generator the brain.
As well, that conscious “thing” within, that “thing” we know as the self, that “thing” that is the structure of our experience and knowing receptor of our experience is perhaps the most mysterious and difficult to understand.
A light bulb gives off light as a function of the energy fed through its structure, when the energy is cut off or the bulb is damaged the light ceases to exist… where does it go?
The experience of self, of feelings is a function of energy fed through the remarkable structure of our very physical brains. Alter that machine, damage it and individual experience is altered. Shut it off and that experience ceases… where does it go?
Nothing is more mysterious than self-awareness, nothing. But how does that mystery lead us to God?
Ya know... Last night's episode of Morgan Freeman's: Into The Wormhole on the Science Channel, was about "Is there a God/Creator"?
In it, there was a segment about a Neuroscientist doing research at a university who has identified a part of the brain, in the right temporal lobe, that he shows when stimulated gives the person a profound sense of connection to nonexistant entities...
He has volunteers participate in a "study on relaxation", where he places them in a dark quiet room, and monitors their brain waves with sensors on a helmet. After some time, he activates a small magnetic coil, no more powerful than that of a small electric motor. They are interviewed afterwards, and 80% report profoundly sensing a being(s) in the room with them [at the moment the coil is activated]. Most of them can even loosely descibe their appearance.
The point is, our brains are wired this way... He has shown that by experiment. And he points out, "imagine what a profound life changing effect that experience could/would have on someone if they were in a church pew, or at a point in their lives where they were 'searching' for answers".
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 08:32am PT
|
After some time, he activates a small magnetic coil, no more powerful than that of a small electric motor. They are interviewed afterwards, and 80% report profoundly sensing a being(s) in the room with them [at the moment the coil is activated]. Most of them can even loosely descibe their appearance.
The point is, our brains are wired this way... He has shown that by experiment. And he points out, "imagine what a profound life changing effect that experience could/would have on someone if they were in a church pew, or at a point in their lives where they were 'searching' for answers".
These two examples are not equivalent and that's the point for spiritual people. It takes a magnetic coil inside of a special helmet to get that effect in the lab yet people have it happen without the magnetism while engaged in spiritual pursuits like praying, meditating, or chanting.
All this proves is that the brain has the capacity to sense a personal presence during certain conditions. We can see and measure the magnet, but cannot explain the other causes/ energies/ intelligences which produce it separately on occasion. A materialist will argue that someday we will, but until then, those who have had such experiences (one of many that can occur), have every right it seems to me, to believe that something unseen, from another parallel dimension (as spoken of in the world's great religions), had an influence on a particular part of their brain.
When they discover that they are happier individuals afterward, and more compassionate and giving to their fellow humans, they become even more convinced that the world's religions speak truthfully of an unseen reality. Their faith is based on their experience.
And wasn't the question asked over a thousand posts ago, why people believe in a God?
|
|
Captain...or Skully
Social climber
Seriously, Man, I didn't know she was Your sister.
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 08:38am PT
|
That's 1 fat troll, huh, Jan?
The why of things.....Pfffft. I don't know or care.
Do as you will, for your own reasons. I'm cool with that.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 09:09am PT
|
impudence is one of the nicest things about supertopo. paul is making sense to me again. werner wants to play neener-neener. i'm not a reductionist, john. you're reading me wrong if you think so.
crags, i know all about saul/paul. a lot of people have had similar experiences with belief, and not necessarily about jesus, as rrradam notes.
there is a certain style to these ancient, belief-oriented writings. if modern christian believers would read a bit of what was written then outside of their bible, they might stop trying to sound like these ancients, who are forever telling others they know more. but you seem sincere, crags, or at least cordial, and i'll rank you right behind climbera5. be nice to crags, fruc.
i'm not a christian, fred, which means i don't accept "as god's word" what you accept. as i've mentioned previously, however, i differ from those who tout a strict sort of atheistic, reductionist science. i've had some personal experience of the paranormal, i've made a small study of it, and i accept a disciplined approach to paranormal science. if you become familiar with this realm, you might begin to rethink that second meaning of miracle and all the long-ago magic-style events used by churches to claim credibility.
i wonder if this david chalmers is trying to enter that territory, largo. i wish you'd stop talking down about such things and asking people to read links, which i think is the great disease of blogging. fine, a link for people who may be interested, but not in lieu of an argument you're trying to make. if you've really mastered this material, i think you ought to be able to explain it to us lesser minds down here.
jennie--it seems the more context, the less sense. perhaps tertullian is giving us koans.
rrradam is someone i can get along with. that stimulation for the experience of the numinous (do you know that term, largo?) is interesting. i would say, just because you can stimulate an experience of god does not necessarily mean that god does not exist. the miracle (that word again) to me is that evolution should have produced the neurological apparatus that can produce such experience. an evolutionist would see convergence. as i say, why can't god be an open question? new information coming in all the time.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 09:49am PT
|
just a short coda (actually going to work today).
to me, the great problem of christianity is its lack of spirituality and its reliance on the miraculous for credibility. largo here goes east for his spiritual grounding, as so many westerners have done. i suggest this is because of the bare cupboard at home. shouting at nonbelievers, "warning" them, doesn't make it very credible. people who have achieved something spiritually exude a certain peace and warmth as well. there is so little of that in the west.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 10:37am PT
|
"I am thankful that we live in a country where we are allowed to choose the things we care to believe in, and be passionate about. And I respect those who have given thoughtful approach in their decision making process... "
Hear, hear!
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 10:41am PT
|
"You are the creator of your own illusion."
This statement covers ALL 'beliefs,' all illusions, all realities.
Boob boom (out go the lights!)
DMT
DMT, sometimes you are such a fruitcake.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
Full Silos of Iowa
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2010 - 10:53am PT
|
"Its very easy to take text out of context when trying to communicate via a keyboard for its difficult to express inflection or emphasis with emotion via facial exressions, body language etc. If ANYONE in this thread could teach us how to properly chat via text it would be Mr. Werner Braun for he has lived in this silent world for all his life and uses this as. I would guess as one of his primary tools of communication, ie; TTY/TDD, etc. God blessed you Werner!"
Wasn't aware of this. But calling people "leg humpers" on a regular basis might not help communications or understanding either.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!