Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
For anything. It may make a person deluded and happy in their ignorance. That is about it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Life From Dirt?
- Thread starter Jimmy
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
If only you see it then it is by definition subjective. If others can see and record the same thing reliably then you can may be correct to claim that it is objective.
PureX
Veteran Member
You really have a very low opinion of your fellow humans, don't you.
PureX
Veteran Member
People envision the goal in different ways, but the universal ideal seems to be one of salvation. Salvation from "sin", which generally means the fear, selfishness, anger, resentment, and confusion that exists in us all as part of our human condition. And doing that through an alignment with the love, forgiveness, kindness, and generosity that also exists within us as the reflection of our Divine Creator. In a nutshell, the goal is being saved from ourselves by becoming better people. And achieving that goal by setting aside that which damages us from within, and aligning ourselves with that which heals us from within.
People will word this is many different ways, and use a lot of different images and metaphors to explain how they feel about it, but I think this is the crux of the story's significance to most of those who hold the story as 'sacred'.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
No, God is a spiritual phenomenon. Ideas and concepts are mental, entities are physical. Each can be accessed in the appropriate way, and it’s my conviction based on personal experience, that a life well lived is a life which gives due regard to all three. That’s how it is for me anyway. I suspect that those who deny the spiritual nevertheless feel the lack thereof quite keenly, but few will ever admit as much.
Audie
Veteran Member
They are not facts. You claim these things,
that don't ring true to me, and as for examples,
you have none, sooo...i figure you made it up.
Last edited:
Certainly there are times in a life where one might wish others to forgive one's past deeds or attitudes. Those are a normal part of human regret. But the idea of dying in order to be "cleansed" can only be applicable to the living who remain to deem the cleansing accomplished, surely? Ecclesiastes 9:5 puts it succinctly ─ "For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost." That seems exactly right to me.
Well, I was with you till the last seven words.
It's just that you don't need supernatural beliefs in order to want to be a better person, or to become one.
But the only place the "spiritual" is known to exist is as a set of concepts and attitudes in individual brains, surely? From the observer's view, the universe is divided into two parts ─ what we might call the self ─ the observer ─ as against everything external to the self, which the self knows about through the senses.
And certainly no "spiritual" alternative universe can be found in reality, surely? Just self, and external reality.
syo
Well-Known Member
Come again?
syo
Well-Known Member
What is abiogenesis?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Did I say that? I said, it is an addendum to an older book. The whole of the older book was pilfered by Christians.
They exist because of physical energy, otherwise they would not have been there.
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, the physical side is necessary, but is it sufficient to explain the everyday world?
Brian2
Veteran Member
You are here saying that theistic scientists who see evidence of God in nature are not scientists but are theologians. Maybe you misunderstood what I said.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, they are not scientists for one understanding of science.
Brian2
Veteran Member
You have all the gospel accounts written after 70 AD. This ignores the internal evidence of the gospels, which show the synoptics were written before 70AD, and uses the presumption that the gospels had to have been written after 70AD because Jesus prophecy about the Temple destruction cannot be true prophecy, because prophecy is not real.
This is circular reasoning which starts with the presumption of no supernatural and ends up showing that the supernatural resurrection account therefore cannot be real because nobody can have been witnesses.
But skeptics it seems do not mind using this circular reasoning. It suite your purpose so you use it.
Nobody saw Jesus rise from the dead, we all know that.
That Jesus died and rose from the dead is shown in each gospel however and the differences in the accounts were not changed by the church so that they all said exactly the same thing. No cheating, so I guess they are all genuine and the differences just shows that witnesses see things differently and stories get passed down and possibly get changed a bit on the way.
The thing that is important is that they all show a risen Jesus.
Do you think that the gospel accounts which were written to show a risen Jesus were added to so that they would show a risen Jesus?
Do you think that the thing that shows Christianity is true was invented by people who believed Christianity is true, so that they could fool themselves.
Maybe you do. You think that Christians were liars then and invented supernatural prophecy and miracles to show that an itinerant preacher was the Son of God who was sent to die and rise again for the salvation of the world.
Me think it mazing.
Paul had the resurrection story already 20 or so years after it happened.
I suppose it must have been invented straight away by Jesus followers, when other followers of other Messiah's just went back to their normal life when their Messiahs showed themselves to not be the Messiah.
The followers of Jesus were different from the start. The Messiah was different from the start.
Brian2
Veteran Member
And it is real and objective that I experience with my senses something different. So the same apply to that I as follows as me:
Objective is real because I have experienced it with my senses.
The experience is subjective from the pov of others because they have not experienced it and have to rely on what you tell them about it. So to them I have subjectively experienced something that may or may not be real and to me I have actually, objectively experienced it and so it is real.
Now you just have to show that you are the real "I" and I am not and then I just answer that I am the real one and you are not.
So right back at you. I am the real one for I and you are not!!!
Sorry I don't understand.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Your standard of your "I" is not the only I. I am also one.
Yes, and it's clear that Mark is the first gospel, and it's clear that Mark 13:2 'predicts' the destruction of the Temple (which happened in 70 CE), and for his trial scene uses as a partial guide and orchestration a Josphus text that wasn't available till 75 CE.
And in the middle, the appalling quality of the evidence, not a single eyewitness (not even a purported one), not a single independent witness or account, no account or mention from anyone at all till more than 20 years after the traditional date.
Exactly the same thing? In a pig's ear, is a polite response to that.
1. Who went to the tomb?
Paul: –
Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome
Matthew: MM, MmJ
Luke: MM, MmJ, Joanna
John: MM
Acts: –
2. What did they see?
Paul: –
Mark: Open tomb
Matthew: An earthquake. An angel descending who rolled away the stone and sat on it.
He looked like lightning, his raiment white as snow
Luke: Open tomb
John: Open tomb
Acts: –
3. Were any guards there?
Paul: -
Mark: No.
Matthew: The guards trembled.
Luke: No
John: No
4. What did they do?
Paul: -
Mark: Went in.
Matthew: -
Luke: Went in
John: Ran to fetch Peter and the Beloved Disciple who ran to the tomb and saw the linen
5. Did they see anyone in or at the tomb?
Paul: -
Mark: Saw one young man in a white robe. Told Jesus had risen, and would meet the disciples at Galilee
Matthew: Addressed by an angel. Told Jesus had risen, and would meet the disciples at Galilee.
Luke: Saw two men in dazzling apparel. Told Jesus was risen.
John: No.
6. What did they do next?
Paul: -
Mark: They fled in fear.
Matthew: They left.
Luke: They went and told the eleven but weren’t believed.
John: Peter and the Beloved Disciple went home.
7. To whom did Jesus first appear?
Paul: Peter
Mark: MM
Matthew: MM and MmJ
Luke: ‘Cleopas’ (= Cephas/Peter?) and Simon
John: MM
8. How?
Paul: -
Mark: As MM fled.
Matthew: As MM and MmJ were going home. He told them he’d meet the disciples at Galilee.
Luke: As Cleopas and Simon walked to Emmaus. They didn’t recognize him. That night at dinner he broke the bread and they realized who he was.
John: At the tomb. MM mistook him for the gardener. Then she recognized him. He said, ‘Inform my brethren’.
9. What did the guards do?
Paul: -
Mark: -
Matthew: Told the chief priests. Were paid to say, Disciples stole the body.
Luke: -
John: -
10. What did the others do?
Paul: -
Mark: -
Matthew: The eleven went to Galilee.
Luke: Went to Jerusalem, told the disciples &c.
John: MM told the disciples.
11. To whom did Jesus second appear?
Paul: The twelve [sic].
Mark: ‘two of them’.
Matthew: The eleven.
Luke: The eleven and others.
John: The disciples and others
12. Where?
Paul: -
Mark: -
Matthew: At Galilee
Luke: While MM, MmJ and Joanna were reporting to the eleven.
John: At table, with doors shut
13. With what result?
Paul: -
Mark: The two told the others but weren’t believed.
Matthew: They worshiped him but some doubted. He told them to preach to all nations.
Luke: They thought he was a ghost. He reassured them. He led them to Bethany. He was carried up to heaven.
John: They were glad. He gave them the Holy Spirit and power to forgive.
14. To whom did Jesus third appear?
Paul: The five hundred.
Mark: The eleven at table. He upbraided them for their disbelief. He told them signs - demons, tongues, serpents, poisons. He went up to heaven.
Matthew: *
Luke: *
John: At the same house as before, with the doors locked. He reassured Thomas.
15. To whom did Jesus fourth appear?
Paul: James
Mark: *
Matthew: *
Luke: *
John: Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the BD and another disciple. They didn’t recognize him at first. They caught lots of fish. They recognized him at breakfast. They argued over the Beloved Disciple waiting till Jesus returned.