Its simply not possible to prove a divine revelation to yourself. How did you determine that aliens aren't experimenting on you and trying to make you believe a fairy tale? Maybe they are trying to see what they can get humans to believe by messing with certain neurotransmitters. Or maybe its...
You couldn't even prove it to yourself. How did you determine that aliens aren't experimenting on you and trying to make you believe a fairy tale--to see what they can get humans to believe by messing with certain neurotransmitters. Or maybe its Satan that's revealed himself to you and is...
Why have you made so many threads? It seems like youre going over board. Maybe you should calm down on the thread spam.
Furthermore, and worse yet, this thread has nothing to do with religious debate at all. You're loading up the religious debate section with this gunk so I have to scroll...
So God's actions also have consequences including the emergence of all that is evil. Will he be judged as well, since he should be fully aware of the consequences of his own actions.
God knowingly created a universe where he knew exactly what would occur before the creation of the universe, including all evil, and could have chosen differently. Therefore he is directly responsible for the evil that occurs if this is the case.
I think both debaters were fairly weak. I mean Lennox was a disaster though. I remember when Lennox was like: "I just can't see how this could happen", and Richard rightly points out that's just the argument from personal incredulity. Lennox then sayswell you're just arguing from personal...
I don't even have to look at the rest of the argument. I see no reason to accept this premise at all. Number one its asserting that it has determined whats going on in the mind of all human beings with respect to all their desires. And what about the desire for a relationship with God? God is...
I can give you evidence if you'd like: The Beginning of TIme
Stephen hawking seems to agree, and I can surely provide you many other sources. its not just my claim. This is the current state of modern physics and cosmology. Go and check it out, but its not just an assertion.
Okay but how is that a justification? Usually a justification is based on evidence and or on a logically necessary argument. It doesn't seem like personal feelings should count as a justification for rational belief.
But what reason do we have to believe that your analogy is accurate? Also why would we label consciousness as a soul? Consciousness seems like a perfectly good word already, so why try to attach a bunch of supernatural baggage by including the soul?
Which is irrelevant because I already told you its a redefinition. And it might still be monistic if its only one physical law, E.G. it turns out there's a theory of everything.
Hence the redefinition to make it more consistent with modern physics. Words change their definitions all the time...
Ok then why did you raise that at all? I never made one of those claims about the multiverse nor am I one of those scientists. And then you presented things like you had a slam dunk argument. The only thing I could imagine you doing was using that as a segway to bring up the fine tuning...
Except i'm not arguing that the soul doesn't exist. I'm just saying there's no rational justification to believe a soul does exist. You're trying to shift the burden of proof by creating a strawman of my position.
I'm fine with saying I don't know. I never claimed to be able to disprove the soul. I'm just saying I don't have a reasonable justification to believe that the soul exists.
I don't have an explanation, but the soul isn't an explanation of anything regardless. What does it explain exactly? How...
You haven't given us a single reason or piece of evidence that would let us conclude that the beginning of the universe and the beginning of time could be remotely comparable to the time of a child being born. The reason why this is a false analogy is because time, according to the current laws...
What justification do we have to think that? I mean are you using the soul in a figurative sense or do you mean something like a supernatural entity/ghost that attaches to the brain?
Conscious thoughts occur in brains and are then translated into sentences by electrical impulses.
You're shifting the burden of proof. Its not my job to demonstrate that there isn't a soul, its your job to demonstrate that there is.
This is the definition from argument verbatim lol!!! We don't understand how the human brain produces sentience and personality and other aspects, so there fore a soul must exist! Just because you don't have a material explanation doesn't mean you're justified in asserting the existence of a...