Why is it that some people believe that they will remain even whence their physical bodies are gone? Does science back this up? Does scripture?
Somehow I don't think that a science that says the universe will go cold and dark one day will also say that life will continue forever beyond that date without any energy to feed it.
Depends upon the science. String theory imagines any of an infinite number of outcomes. Do you mean that a big bang expanding universe eventually leads to an imploding universe? Black holes?
There are NOT many people who believe that God will save them from death. Quite the opposite, they strongly contend that after death, God will judge them and exact either a reward or penalty according to the life they have lived.
However, there are scientists who believe that old age and death are degenerative diseases of mankind. They are inventing and devising ways to retard the aging process thus extending youth and longetivity. Few among these scientists proclaim that in the future, 1,000 years will be the NORMAL life expectancy. There are still other scientists who believe that there will be physical immortality.
No, I mean that eventually entropy will be as complete as it can get; that there will be no more free energy available for life to use. No more stars burning, no chemical or nuclear reactions of any kind taking place.
Whether that comes about as a black hole or a total dispersion of energy remains to be seen, but one day the universe will die.
How is it again that all this begins when entropy rules?
If you speak of the big bang, who really knows? The last I heard, no God was necessary for it to happen, (it needed no cause) but truthfully the concept of action without cause is beyond my feeble brain.
I still have to wonder if we won't eventually figure out that it is cyclical; that one day it will collapse back to a singularity and start all over. Maybe with another bBerean and Wilderness once more conversing on a virtual internet and thus negating the concept of free will.
Conversely then, perhaps that explains why this conversation with you seems vaguely familiar.
Where do you think this so-called 'energy' is going to go? Why do you think it will go 'cold and dark'?
I'm going to go all silly and philosophical for a minute...
Technically, science does back up immortality... of a sort.
If matter cannot be created or destroyed, then we all immortal. The atoms of my body saw the beginning of all space and time and will someday exist to see the sun rise over alien planets. I will and have been reincarnated billions of times, in billions of places and billions of individual lifeforms. I have already been reincarnated into other living beings while I -in this form- have existed on this planet.
Just my take on it...I should probably get some sleep.
Yes, there are many scientists who believe that there would be eventually physical immortality. They believe that aging and death to be total aberrations of humankind. They strongly assert with the gradual advancement of technology, there WILL be physical immortiality.
A scientist by the name of Dr. Aubrey de Grey indicated that it will be possible for humankind to live to be a millenium old. As I have stated to Virginia Lynne, 100 will be about it for me. By then, hopefully, I will have done what I was on the earh plane to do. At 100, it will be my time to exit the earth plane for other planes.
My thoughts entirely. Once you establish that matter cannot be created or destroyed then everything else follows and falls into place in the way you describe.
Dang, 1000 years? Some really think that. And how? And who would want to live 1000 years???
Yep, I was reading and watching Dr. Aubrey de Grey, a scientist, indicating that old age is a degenerative process. Dr. de Grey further stated that youth is a natural state which can be extended. Dr. de Grey maintained that through science, youth and longetivity can be enhanced and there would be no reason why mankind can live to be a 1000 years old.
There are some people who would want to live that long and see what society would be like in the far future granted that they are strong and have all their facilities intact. For me, 100 years would be it. By that time, I would be ready to see further spheres/planes.........
51% of the world believe in God, 92% of Americans... It's possible there's something to it.
Please, could you explain to me what is your own definition of GOD? Each religion has its own definition of their God and even their own version (story) of the "Truth". But I would appreciate if you can tell me what is God to you so I can better understand what you mean with "It's possible there's something to it".
God bless you!
And where did you get those numbers anyway? According to the page "Religion in the United States" posted in Wikipedia, despite a high level of religious adherence, only 9% of Americans in a 2008 poll said religion was the most important thing in their life, compared with 45% who said family was paramount in their life and 17% who said money and career was paramount.
The moment people forsake religion, or God in a society, ancient or modern, it is the moment the society becomes rotten, like US now.
Beth was referring to how many people, when polled, responded that they believe there is a god. Not specific to any religion, or saying which god.
Yeah I can perfectly read English, but please, you should cite the sources of information and data you use rather than just throwing around statistical assertions. And in this case even better if you define what is God to have an idea of your position. For example, I am an atheist. I don't believe in God. What's an atheist? Is defined primarily in two senses: Someone who says he believes there is no God, and someone who simply lacks belief in God.
There have been many polls. Gallup is pretty well respected so: http://www.gallup.com/poll/147887/ameri … e-god.aspx
As part of the Survey Methods, results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted May 5-8, 2011, with a random sample of 1,018 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. They claim that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.
I googled it.
God is a being that is not human in nature, without beginning or end, Who is the definition of love. He is the Creator of mankind, animals, the universe, Heaven and Hell. I'm sure I've left out quite a bit, but that was off the top of my head... no googling.
Not quite sure if that's what you personally think God is, or if you googled it to better articulate what God is to you... in any case, and with all due respect Beth, I think religion stops people from thinking and is justified based on a book called "The Bible" which is just a bunch of childish and silly little stories like the existence of heaven and hell.
Do you think getting a job and trading your time for money is one of the worst things you can do to generate income?
I like how ppl say "with all due respect" right before they say something that has little to no respect for your feelings/opinions.
My son does that. He says something kinda mean, and then says, "No offense!" Course he's 13.
He is talking about religion and the bible, which has absolutely nothing to do with your feelings or opinions. If you say you believe in the bible, you are therefore disrespecting his feelings and opinions.
See how silly that is?
So, anything anybody says about your religion or the bible is mean?
Beth I wish I can say "I'm sorry", but I'm afraid to hurt your feelings, again.
Wow, that is so mean of you to say such nasty things about nature, mankind, animals and the universe.
Whoa Beth, where is it written that the God of love created a place called hell?
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Very weird stuff from that book... kind of creepy. Maybe is time for a new book don't you think so? Of course not.
I like Osho's vision on religion: "The so called religion is a dead rock. They don't flow, they don't change, they don't move with the times. And anything that is dead is not going to help you -- unless you want to make a grave, and then perhaps the rock may be helpful. All the so-called religions have been making graves for you, destroying your life, your love, your joy, and filling your heads with fantasies, illusions, hallucinations about God, about heaven and hell, about reincarnation, and all kinds of crap."
That's a judgement call on your part. Why do you think the world is "rotten"?
Did I say that the world is rotten? I can't find it in my comments. I would love to travel more around the world to personally experience different cultures and forge my own opinion of things. So far I've lived in 3 countries completely different in terms of politics, economics and religion (Cuba, Guatemala and USA).
What I said was that societies like US becomes rotten the moment people forsake religion. And I should add to that comment any sect or cult organizations such as the Landmark "Education" Forum, which some see it as education, and others like me as brainwashing.
Because human beings are incapable of digesting nonexistence. The thing heaven and hell share is continued self awareness. Heaven=fun, hell=suffering, but we would still be self aware, we would still exist.
Death is always associated with something bad or evil in the minds of people, thus believing God will save us from any evil is completely normal.
Science wise not quite sure but scripture wise they is life after death even Jesus did die and his physical body buried but on the third day he ascended to heaven.
I think people like to believe they will remain behind in some form, as it gives them hope, something to hold onto. Lets face it, imagining yourself dead and gone, no trace of you left behind, and the world just going on as normal is quite a saddening thought. So people like to think that there will be something afterwards. In science there is nothing to back this up of course, our brains are what give us thought, and as soon as that brain cannot be supported, we are no longer alive. We are gone forever. Scripture wise, the example mentioned before of Jesus being reborn after he died on the cross. Then of course the popular belief of Heaven and Hell. Those who are good in life to to heaven where they can have an eternal life of happiness, and those who murder and sin go to hell, where they are the Devils slaves.
Most Christians believe in life after death because the Bible teaches it; the resurrection of Christ is the central belief of our faith. Christianity teaches that we are immortal souls living in perishable bodies, and that after the body dies, the soul gets out and goes to God, just as you would get out and walk home if your car broke down. We believe that where you go from there depends on whether you go to God thinking you're okay on your own, in which case you pay for your sins (imperfections) yourself, or whether you repent of your sins and accept Christ's atonement -- in which case, He pays for them all. Science cannot prove or disprove such things; it deals with the physical. It doesn't have the tools to measure spiritual experiences.
Christians do not believe that God will save them from a physical death, but rather we will be saved from a spiritual death. Nowhere in the bible does it say that God will rescue his followers from the physical death that you are talking about. In fact, Paul said in Philippians 1:21 - For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.
We all must die at some point, and the one question you should be asking is NOT (When will I die), nor should it be (How long can I live?), but rather it should be (Am I ready?)
We have all sinned, and we'll all fall short of the glory of God. Nobody can be perfect, no matter how hard we try. Keeping that in mind, heaven, which we all want to go, is a perfect place. It is a place where absolutely no sin can enter. ANYBODY who has any sort of blemish is banned from heaven, and there is only one other place to go... this is called the everlasting death... hell.
Now you're probably thinking that this means that nobody can go into heaven, and by all rights, we shouldn't be able to. We are all facing the everlasting death.
...but God has provided us a way to conquer this death. I quote this verse from the Bible:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
This verse here is the core of christian faith. This is the rescue from death Christians talked about. Anybody who tells otherwise, that God will rescue us from physical death, has a very wrong idea of the Christian faith.
This idea of his only begotten son (Jesus) rescuing us from eternal death may be a bit confusing. I believe this article is a very great read if you want to learn more.
As for scientific evidence that there is a god, you'll find that there on that site as well.
Sounds like Christians believe that a part of us that we've never been able to locate or detect will be taken by an ET that we've never been able to locate or detect to another universe that we've never been able to locate or detect. Because ancient people that thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe wanted to believe it and did so without any other reason than that desire.
Something I've never been able to swallow...
Can you give me any attributes of "spirit" that are agreed on nearly worldwide AND that are testable?
Why would I believe in something that has been looked for for 5,000 years, has as many descriptions as there are people and yet has never been found?
That's interesting wilderness... So many ppl groups for all time have believed that man has a spirit. So it must not be that ppl all agree, cause ppl don't even all agree on science or God. It must be simply that you are a tactile, visual person and if you can't see it or touch it, it's not real.
No - I believe that many things that I can't touch or see are quite real. Bacteria, for instance.
The are all detectable, however, either by "seeing" them (via x-rays etc. if necessary) or by observing their results and being able to manipulate those results by manipulating the thing itself. Bacteria, again - kill it and the disease goes away. Or protons - smash two of them together and the results are predictable and known even if protons cannot be seen.
People have believed in a thousand things over the years that cannot be detected in any manner, and those beliefs have all died as they were, one by one, proven wrong. Over the millenia we've learned that lesson, and now define the concepts such as "spirit" as being completely undetectable to humans forever. We also define these things in such a manner that everyone can make up their own concept of what it is, making it impossible to either find OR disprove. But using these methods of definition doesn't make the concepts true, it just means we've gotten smarter about how we make our definitions.
"People have believed in a thousand things over the years that cannot be detected in any manner, and those beliefs have all died as they were, one by one, proven wrong."
I would reword that. I personally would say:
People have believed in God for thousands and thousands of years and no matter how hard some tried to prove them wrong, they could not destroy their belief... not in any manner.
I gotta go to bed now wilderness... sweet dreams.
Before I can give an intelligent answer I must know what "spirit" means. Can you give me a definition?
You did give an answer.
"Why would I believe in something that has been looked for for 5,000 years, has as many descriptions as there are people and yet has never been found?"
Do you mean that is not an intelligent answer?
Definition of SPIRIT
: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms
: a supernatural being or essence: as
a capitalized : holy spirit
b : soul 2a
c : an often malevolent being that is bodiless but can become visible; specifically : ghost 2
d : a malevolent being that enters and possesses a human being
: temper or disposition of mind or outlook especially when vigorous or animated <in high spirits>
: the immaterial intelligent or sentient part of a person
a : the activating or essential principle influencing a person <acted in a spirit of helpfulness>
b : an inclination, impulse, or tendency of a specified kind : mood
a : a special attitude or frame of mind <the money-making spirit was for a time driven back — J. A. Froude>
b : the feeling, quality, or disposition characterizing something <undertaken in a spirit of fun>
: a lively or brisk quality in a person or a person's actions
: a person having a character or disposition of a specified nature
: a mental disposition characterized by firmness or assertiveness <denied the charge with spirit>
a : distillate 1: as (1) : the liquid containing ethanol and water that is distilled from an alcoholic liquid or mash —often used in plural (2) : any of various volatile liquids obtained by distillation or cracking (as of petroleum, shale, or wood) —often used in plural
b : a usually volatile organic solvent (as an alcohol, ester, or hydrocarbon)
a : prevailing tone or tendency <spirit of the age>
b : general intent or real meaning <spirit of the law>
: an alcoholic solution of a volatile substance <spirit of camphor>
: enthusiastic loyalty <school spirit>
capitalized Christian Science : god 1b
See spirit defined for English-language learners »
See spirit defined for kids »
Examples of SPIRIT
the spirits of my ancestors
Some religions believe that the same spirit is reincarnated many times in different bodies.
Yoga is very healthy for both body and spirit.
We will all miss her generous spirit.
My father was a proud spirit.
Origin of SPIRIT
Middle English, from Anglo-French or Latin; Anglo-French, espirit, spirit, from Latin spiritus, literally, breath, from spirare to blow, breathe
First Known Use: 13th century
Presuming than definitions 5 through 14 are NOT what you refer to:
1. There is no animating "principle" that gives life to organisms. It happens as the result of chemical reactions, not some undefined and made up principle. No belief
2a. There is nothing known outside of nature, thus no "supernatural" being. Everything in the universe is by definition a part of nature, there is nothing known to exist outside of the universe. No belief.
2b. "soul" is also undefined just as spirit was. I suspect that "soul" means "spirit" in the context we discuss - a round robin definition that is worthless for discussion.
2c. No bodiless being that neither reflects nor absorbs visible light (except at it's volition) has ever been found. Claimed for millenia, but never found. No, can't believe this one either.
3. Again, not a definition that seems in context for this discussion.
4. Sentient part of a person could be defined as the brain; I believe it exists. An immaterial (non-natural?) portion has never been found nor detected. In addition, "immaterial" is rather undefined in itself; does that mean energy? Empty space? Gravity? All of those I believe, but an undefined "immaterial" cannot be accepted as truth as it is undefined. No belief.
This is exciting news! So they have found the chemicals that are responsible for animation? Can we just add them back in when something dies? Oh wait...all the chemicals are usually still there when something dies. Hmmmm. Why does it no longer animate? Why do the chemicals stop reacting and if we know that, why can't we just add new ones and get the life going again? Perhaps with some lightning, courtesy of Dr. Frankenstein? Wasn't that the premise of the novel...if you have all the components of life you should be able to re-animate it?
Sentience. Awareness. Thought. All immaterial. You can detect when the mind interacts with the brain, but you cannot detect the mind itself. Just the interaction is detectable. You can't pull an image from the brain because the thought is not material...it is part of the mind. The brain is the computer the spirit, soul, mind, (whatever you want to call it), uses to interact with the material world.
You seek a referent for the word, how about that thing which we cannot detect but is made evident by it's interaction with the brain, which can be detected. Although we cannot detect, see or read the mind itself, giving it a name is valid. If, as you suggest, sentience, thought, etc. were part of the brain and could all be explained materialistically you could physically control, view and produce thought. In spite of how much science has tried, and would like to, we can't.
It may be exciting to you, I couldn't say. Most people realize that the body is a chemical factory - the it is the chemical reactions that provide life. Yes, the atoms are all there when we die, but not the molecular structure. Without the constant influx of oxygen, for instance, the molecules will quickly fall apart into other molecules and we die.
What is much more interesting is that some people don't understand the chemistry (no one has complete knowledge) so they will postulate a "mind", a "spirit" or "soul". Something undetectable that cannot be found by any means. They will even claim that this "mind" is responsible for the chemical/electrical activity seen. Then they postulate an ET that put it in our brain/body, also undetectable. Then another universe for the ET to live in, still undetectable. Then commands from the ET on how to live, again pretty much undetectable by anyone but the individual. And when they have made all that up without any need for evidence they will live their lives according to the commands they think the ET has given them.
All because they don't understand biological chemistry, want answers anyway but are unwilling to spend the lifetime necessary to gain partial knowledge. Most fascinating.
Christians do NOT believe in ET aliens that will take us to another universe. This is not any kind of metaphysics.
Yes, I do admit that we cannot locate or detect heaven and hell, nor was it meant to be detected. God is above the natural laws of the universe. Science cannot prove God because science deals with the physical universe.
It's like the boy and the kite story. A boy was flying a kite when a man came along and asked what he doing. The boy replied, but the man could not see the kite. The man ask the boy how he knew there was a kite up there. The boy simply replied: I feel the pull.
As for the ancients believing the earth is flat, this was true in most cases. The Bible, though, tells a different story. Here's a verse from the bible...
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
Of course, this doesn't prove anything, but it is interesting the way it's worded.
Here are two articles I think you'll find interesting.
It's nice to have some concrete proof for once of the Bible's authenticity rather than the usual airy fairy analogies and allegories that smug people put forward to give the impression they're full of wisdom and understanding while others are sad, uneducated, unsaved simpletons.
Sadly, it's bad news for those who glow with pride because they continue to believe in God in the face of lack of evidence, archaeological or otherwise, to support their belief. Now they have to compete with atheists on a level playing field.
According to geologists, the world will become void in 500 million years when the sun goes out..... Oh well, on that note, I am going to retire for the night and watch a History Channel documentary on time travel on youtube.
I hear you saying you do not believe we have a soul... you already said that.
You just asked for a definition, so I provided you with one. You're welcome.
Curiosity compels me to ask which of those 15 definitions is pertinent to your original question?
b : soul 2a
And in case you need the definition of soul...
Definition of SOUL
: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
a : the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe
b capitalized Christian Science : god 1b
: a person's total self
a : an active or essential part
b : a moving spirit : leader
a : the moral and emotional nature of human beings
b : the quality that arouses emotion and sentiment
c : spiritual or moral force : fervor
: person <not a soul in sight>
: personification <she is the soul of integrity>
a : a strong positive feeling (as of intense sensitivity and emotional fervor) conveyed especially by black American performers
b : negritude
c : soul music
d : soul food
e : soul brother
See soul defined for English-language learners »
See soul defined for kids »
Examples of SOUL
the souls of the dead
He could not escape the guilt that he felt in the inner recesses of his soul.
Some poor soul was asking for handouts on the street.
a village of barely a hundred souls
Origin of SOUL
Middle English soule, from Old English sāwol; akin to Old High German sēula soul
First Known Use: before 12th century
And in case you ask which def. I would have to say these fit pretty well.
: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
a : the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings,
So "soul", your usage, equals "spirit". Ignoring all the other definitions of "spirit", that's how I would define it, too.
Unfortunately, that leaves both soul AND spirit undefined and thus unbelievable. They are both defined as the other - without any real definition neither can truly be "believed". A word must, after all, have a referent in order to believe, and there is none here. Only the word - a collection of letters that refers to nothing.
I will explain it like I did to my kids when they were little. Our bodies are like cars. Our souls are like the drivers. Our cars take us from place to place, but when we die, our cars break down and our drivers get out and leave them behind.
Our souls are the essence of who we are. We are not bone and flesh alone... we are not blood and organs alone... We have emotion and intelligence and the ability to communicate in so many forms. I am not limited to communicating with you in person, as you can see. I can't even see your face, and I'm communicating with you now. I have no doubt that we can and do communicate with God... and that my soul will some day be with Him.
As a dictionary, you suck . Let's see if I can explain and somehow make my thoughts comprehensible.
The driver of your body is your brain - it provides the electrical impulses that tell your heart to beat, your stomach to digest and your elbow to bend. It is not some immaterial, untouchable or knowable "essence" imagined up out of nothingness. Brain is not soul, soul is not brain. At best, soul might be the patterns of electrical activity, but it is not the pattern that drives your body - it is that tiny electron moving down the nerve.
You describe what we are not - bone, flesh, blood or organs alone, but that does not define soul. You add "things" that are not things at all, like emotion or intelligence - but if a soul can exist it must be a "thing", not a human concept or ability. Once more, the pattern of electrical activity in your organic brain might be a "soul" - the pattern, not the electron flow itself. If so, however, that pattern disappears with death and the cessation of neurological activity.
I can believe that you have an idea, a concept that you name soul. Whether or not that concept or idea has any connection with reality, however, is unknown and will forever remain unknown until it can be defined well enough to test against the reality we live in to see if it is there.
It should be a fun time when your kids eventually figure out that souls have never been shown to exist.
"Mommy, why did you lie to us?"
You are communicating with us as a result of science, facts and evidence, which also shows that we are indeed bone, flesh, blood and organs, alone.
Yes, I would agree those are probably the relevant definitions as to what believers often refer. But, just because there is are definitions in the dictionary does not mean the thing actually exists. I can find unicorn and leprechaun in the dictionary, too.
Neither of the things described by those definitions have ever been shown to exist. The human body operates entirely as a result of biochemical reactions.
The ultimate question in the first place would be, is there a God? Either there is a Creator or there isn't as well as I can understand. Either the existence of the world is intentional or an accident. According to Scripture, man is created in the image of God. Genisis 1:27 "So God created mankind in His own image, in the image of God He created them..." (NIV) Many Chrisitans also believe that the world is dualistic in the sense that there is the physical realm and a spirtiual realm. People are believed to be a spirit in a body, the soul is what makes you, you. Many Christians believe in the trinity. One God three personages. God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. All are pieces of God. And since man is created in God's image wouldn't people be more than just a body? People are spirit too. Your spirit doesn't need a body to survive. Your body needs a spirit to survive, according to the Christian Worldview. There is other scriptural support, too. I would be glad to look up more and most if any one was interested. I do think your question is valid. As for the scientific part, I am not sure there is much evidence for the soul surviving after the body has died. That is hard to measure and is not something of the empirical. These are questions that I believe even Christians should think about.
There is very little scientific study exploring the possibility of life after mortal death. There is zero scientific proof, that I know of, stating that there is no life after mortal death.
There are numerous scriptural accounts, accross various religions, stating that life continues after mortal death.
To answer your question, Why do people think that GOD will save them from death? It's because they believe that to be the case. Why else do people do anything?
Beth37 posted, "I will explain it like I did to my kids when they were little. Our bodies are like cars. Our souls are like the drivers. Our cars take us from place to place, but when we die, our cars break down and our drivers get out and leave them behind."
Where this explanation falls apart is that cars don't have separate drivers or 'souls'. Cars are just cars. There are cars that can drive themselves now. Are they alive with souls?
We ARE the car in this analogy. The cars brain is its operating system. When it is started up (when the right chemicals and electrical energy come together), the car operates as a whole. When it is shut down (when the gas runs out or the electrical misfires or for any number of other reasons), the car is effectively dead.
So, when our particular body parts come together and our brain fires up, we are "alive". When our bodies senesce (get old), we die.
When some scientists figure out how to keep the body alive (or even just the brain alive), we will be immortal.
There is already evidence of a jellyfish Turritopsis nutricula, thought to be, in effect, immortal.
At the very least, medicine has figured out ways to extend our lifetimes. Yes, even re-animate a "corpse" that at one time would have been considered very dead.
So, again, where is God (or spirits, or souls) in this equation? The truth is that we are biological machines that are started up when the right conditions exist and again, under a different set of circumstances, we simply stop functioning.
The only way to kill Turritopsis nutricula is by deliberate murder.
Beth's analogy didn't fall apart...you modified it into a different one, but let's go with that. In your analogy the car's brain is it's operating system. This actually does illustrate the point well because that "brain", the operating system, still isn't sentient. You put a driver in the car, (mind), to interact with the operating system and of course physical controls, (brain), and off goes the car, (body), where the mind tells it to go. As for cars that drive themselves, still not sentient. Someone, (mind), programs them.
We, (mind/soul/spirit), already are immortal. Your soul doesn't get old and tired, which is why every 70 year old is upset they can't do what they could when they were 20. Their mind, (barring disease), is game for it. You are correct though in that keeping the interface between the spirit and material world (brain) alive would keep us interacting with the material world.
Now, would you care to address my response to Wilderness posted a little earlier, regarding the mind/spirit/soul?
Wilderness' response seems to be possible. A 'pattern' of electrical impulses could account for what is known as a 'soul', although there are tons of electrical patterns that are NOT souls as theists understand them.
And newer cars with 'brains' do indeed interact with the physical world almost exactly as we do. They have sensors to detect various parameters and they apply 'thought' to solving issues with braking, speeding up, needing air, etc. My husband believes that muscle cars have 'soul' (whatever that may be).
I stand with my original statement. We are like cars or machines (biological) and we have no "soul". Just start us up and let us run until we stop. Time is actually irrevelant.
Don't feel bad...Wilderness could not address any of my points either.
By the way, as a long time car guy and hot rodder, tell your husband I understand the sentiment. I have owned many muscle cars and if they didn't have souls, they certainly all had personalities.
Why is believing in a God, a heaven and hell or any other sort of after life considered destructive?
Simple, because religion poisons the mind and deteriorates human logic. Religion holds the human race back from advancing into a better understanding and quality of life.
One thing I like of being atheist is that you don't have to know the ultimate "truth" of things to be an atheist. You just have to stay curious and never stop questioning everything, especially if something keeps you in limitation.
"Why is believing in a God, a heaven and hell or any other sort of after life considered destructive?"
It's not considered 'destructive', it's considered erroneous.
Well for a start many, if not all, religions have been responsible for wars fought in their name. Apart from paganism that is, which, interestingly, was almost totally wiped out by the brutal excesses of Christianity.
"As for cars that drive themselves, still not sentient."
Ok, now we will need to define 'sentient'.
We think, therefore we are (sentient).
By that definition, anything that 'thinks', is sentient. And a car's brain can certainly think. It is capable of independent thought regarding its sensors. Once it evolves to a brain as complex as our brain currently is, it will most definitely be "sentient".
Our brains are much more complex than the brains of millions of years ago and we can only imagine how complex they will be a million years from now.
This includes animals that can think as well as non-biological things that can think.
My definition of sentient: If it can "think", it is sentient.
Once it stops "thinking", it is dead. No soul or spirit or God is needed.
You have a low bar for what thought and sentience are. A car, or for that matter the most sophisticated computer man has yet devised, is no more sentient than a clock wound with a spring. All three are simply programmed and perform according to that program. A complex program capable of "answering" questions and "making decisions" may appear sentient, which is what drives the false hope of "artificial intelligence", but it all boils down to the programming. If it seems intelligent, then credit the programmer for having thought of and covered so many different possible scenarios for it to respond to. None of those devices will ever have a thought. No material thing will.
Is the jellyfish sentient? It would have less capability than most of what you are calling sentient.
Are you equating sentence with being aware with one's self?
How do you define it?
Why do you think a human brain is more sentient than any other brain? You think there is something super special about being human?
You may be deluded into thinking that. How would you know? Elephants and Whales may very well be 'smarter' than we are. Their brains are certainly larger.
sen•tient (ˈsɛn ʃənt)
1. having the power of perception by the senses; conscious.
2. characterized by sensation and consciousness.
a. Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts. See Synonyms at aware.
b. Mentally perceptive or alert; awake: The patient remained fully conscious after the local anesthetic was administered.
2. Capable of thought, will, or perception: the development of conscious life on the planet.
3. Subjectively known or felt: conscious remorse.
4. Intentionally conceived or done; deliberate: a conscious insult; made a conscious effort to speak more clearly.
5. Inwardly attentive or sensible; mindful: was increasingly conscious of being watched.
6. Especially aware of or preoccupied with. Often used in combination: a cost-conscious approach to further development; a health-conscious diet.
In psychoanalysis, the component of waking awareness perceptible by a person at any given instant; consciousness.
I don't believe any brain is sentient. The brain is a machine utilized by the mind/soul/spirit, (which are not material), to interact with the material world. Everything that can be detected in terms of brain activity is a result of the interaction between the mind and the brain. Although it can still be fully intact, a brain cannot think if the spirit is gone. There are rudimentary functions, maintaining the body, which are likely hardwired and programmed into the brain, but thought is not a function of it. When the mind thinks, the brain responds. We can only monitor thought to the degree the physical manifestation of the interface is detectable.
You know and I know souls and spirits have never been shown to exist.
The brain is the physical means of processing the input from the complex network of senses that span the human body. The mind is simply the explanations we use to interpret and understand the results of that processing.
No invisible boogeymen required.
Could you please ship me a pound of justice, an ounce of courage, and perhaps 2 cups of pride? None of these are material, nor can they be scientifically shown to exist. What we do because of them, our actions, can...but the driving force...the thought and concept itself...their inception and origin? All immaterial. In fact...everything we care about and that matters in life can be boiled down to something immaterial. Love. Acceptance. Fairness. Mercy. Justice. Security. Comfort. All concepts you cannot capture on a meter or display on a screen. Do any exist? Sure, but they are in the purview of the mind, which is also immaterial, and therefore not directly accessible to science.
Arguments from incredulity. Sorry, that you don't understand those things.
You have earned your reputation for being dismissive, while missing or ignoring the points made. You have buzz phrases which I expect you feel make you sound like you are giving an intelligent response. As long as they make you feel good about yourself, as though you had actually answered or addressed anything. Often, you don't even use them correctly. "Arguments from incredulity", for example, would be properly used refering to you, as I am not the one lacking the imagination required to understand the premise of argument you are avoiding.
Actually, an 'argument from incredulity' is a logical fallacy and is pretty much the same as an 'argument from ignorance'. It is unreasonable to conclude something is impossible just because you don't know anything about it.
So yes, it is used correctly on your post.
Perhaps WE are programmed according to some program or pattern that evolved over time. No way to know the answer.
What is a thought if not the result of a complex network of a biochemical medium transmitting electrical impulses as data from on-board sensors.
While it appears to be an arduous task, it probably will be achievable to begin replicating the human brain as technology progresses.
Perhaps someday they could 3d print the grey matter, but animating it and getting sentience won't happen. That is the job of the spirit and we can't make those. If you believe that will be possible, why wait for the 3d printed version? Why not reanimate one that has already been tested?
Nonsense, all the components of the brain could be synthesized. It may not look like a brain, but it could work like one. Invisible hobgoblins are not required.
Let me know how that reanimation goes for you. Please cc Dr. Frankenstein, because it has been a source of frustration for him as well.
I think we both have no idea what you're talking about.
That made me laugh, Troubled!
Simply because we cannot do a specific task now does not mean that we will never be able to. Good grief! That's just a nonsense argument.
Manufactured sentient brains will one day be possible. We learned how to clone biomachines, right? (In the same sense that we are biomachines). Yep, no invisible spirits needed.
If a biomachine mal-functions, is it because the spirit is defective? Or maybe because it isn't 'wired' correctly. I'm guessing the latter.
It is appropriate that you appreciate ATMs simple and vacuous responses, as it would appear as though you are her apprentice. You have the "missing and evading the points" part down. Keep following your mentor and soon you will be able to spew the dismissive, but superficially intelligent sounding one liners.
Why do people think that GOD will save them from death?
Do they ????
I thought that he would save them after death, so they can go to heaven. Never heard that God would save anybody from dying itself.
by haj33965 weeks ago
When God come How many people will be saved that are alive. the bible states only 144,000, that are alive will be save out the whole world. How many dead will be saved, the bible state a number that no man can number.
by Castlepaloma4 years ago
I ask a Jehovah woman that came to my doorWill only 144,000 men make it to heaven , She said yes.There will be no heaven for me or for women or paradise on earth, can that be true?
by jerami7 years ago
The saints reign with Christ on earth for a thousand years, while Satan is bound in the pit. Is that statement scriptual? What do you think? I think NOT !!
by Julie Grimes2 months ago
I think that the Christian religion would have been entirely different, if Apostle Paul hadn't screwed things up. It is my firm belief that if Christians really want to be Christ-like, they need to have a dual...
by Disappearinghead4 years ago
For the very many years I was in Church attendance, the Kingdom of God was always equated with Heaven. It was a future event that only those who believed in Jesus would see either when they died or were raptured, whilst...
by Claire Evans4 years ago
It's easy to deconvert to atheism because they are disappointed, hurt or because they have lost their faith due to God making sense. It's harder to suddenly make a rational atheists convert to Christianity, which...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.