Scientists finally prove there IS life after death

[Windwalker]

Evolution doesn't work like lottery, the gamblers are knowing what they're doing, they pay money to participate in the game, they play the game
and all of them are qualified to win by luck.

You are very much in error in what you are saying. Casinos very clearly are working with statistics of wins versus losses, and they work in their favor. A lottery is the same thing. Even though they do a cash payout, they will always end up making very large profits. If that were not so, they wouldn't offer them to players. That's why they exist. They always win, even when they lose! They win more than they lose. It's not about the players, but the house who has the statistics stacked in their favor.

Evolution is playing in favor of the house, it's not about the players! And this is the source of your error in thinking about evolution being about "us". It's not. It's about Life, and we just happen to be winning for the time, but in time we lose then go home and other winners move in. But the house is always winning because people keep playing. That's how it works.

For your metaphor to work then the gamblers should found themselves competing to gain the money while not knowing who is offering
the money and for what reason.and the gamblers themselves have no choice but to play, does it really make sense to you.

The gambler's are competing to win, of course! That's why all species have a survival instinct built into them. All the players do. But here's the cool little truth in what you say that I'm not sure you see. They don't know who is offering the price, they keep "reaching" and it's like a plant reaching towards sunlight, it doesn't "know" it's the sun. They just "know" to reach, that's all.

Were the gamblers in the lottery playing according to their choices and knowing what they're doing? that isn't the case with evolution,
it isn't a planned process compared to the lottery.

As far as having no choice, all players in Life really do have no choice but to play, for the most part. You can of course have those who choose not to play, but that choice is the choice of suicide. They choose to not play the game of life anymore. But those who choose to live, are in fact choosing to play. They see that Life that surges in them is worthwhile enough to play the odds games. And this is why you have things like societies forming, and stuff. We choose to collectively help each other against the odds. And so on and so forth.

He was the grandfather of humans and chimps, you may call him chimpyman, he didn't went extinct, but his next generations
were humans and chimps.

This seems almost a semantical argument. If they as they were, the species of pre-humans gave birth to humans on one line and chimps on another, but that species only exists now as humans, chimps, and whatever other species, that is actually evolution. However, that original species as that species itself now no longer exists - as that original species. Therefore, guess what? They as that species went extinct. They no longer exist as that prehuman species. That species is gone. Or do you believe that species that gave rise to humans and chimps actually exists as that prehuman species today? If so, I'm more than interested in your thoughts about that.

Humans started with the new creation of Adam, Adam came similar to Jesus by developing in a womb and not by magic, it was clearly
stated in one verse that Adam and Jesus came to earth by the same process, and we know how Jesus came, by virgin Mary.

A virgin birth is an act of magic, or miracle if you prefer that word. In either case, it's outside natural laws, that makes it "magic".

Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, "Be," and he was (3:59)

Of course I hear metaphor expressed here, which in a sense is true scientifically. All life is created from dust. All of it. We're all made of stardust! We are made of the various elements cooked and baked in the hot molten earth that rose to the surface, which as live evolved it integrated into bodies made of things like carbon, and iron, calcium, and a list of other "dust from the earth"! It's quite fun that way to take the metaphor literally, and be right! However, this is how ALL life was formed, not just Adam or Jesus, but all of us. That's the scientific view.

But how did John participate in the game, did he choose to come and to participate in the game or someone
magically put him to play.

He was born into the grand Casino. Yes, he chose to participate, by choosing Life, by chosing to live.

 

[FearGod]

You are very much in error in what you are saying. Casinos very clearly are working with statistics of wins versus losses, and they work in their favor. A lottery is the same thing. Even though they do a cash payout, they will always end up making very large profits. If that were not so, they wouldn't offer them to players. That's why they exist. They always win, even when they lose! They win more than they lose. It's not about the players, but the house who has the statistics stacked in their favor.

Evolution is playing in favor of the house, it's not about the players! And this is the source of your error in thinking about evolution being about "us". It's not. It's about Life, and we just happen to be winning for the time, but in time we lose then go home and other winners move in. But the house is always winning because people keep playing. That's how it works.

It's the same illogical thoughts that some Christians use to accept the trinity as a logical thing while it isn't, anyway

You're very wrong as the house is planned and designed and not the work of chance and luck..

The gambler's are competing to win, of course! That's why all species have a survival instinct built into them. All the players do. But here's the cool little truth in what you say that I'm not sure you see. They don't know who is offering the price, they keep "reaching" and it's like a plant reaching towards sunlight, it doesn't "know" it's the sun. They just "know" to reach, that's all.

And do you believe that those players came to the lottery by chance, something is built in them to participate?

As far as having no choice, all players in Life really do have no choice but to play, for the most part. You can of course have those who choose not to play, but that choice is the choice of suicide. They choose to not play the game of life anymore. But those who choose to live, are in fact choosing to play. They see that Life that surges in them is worthwhile enough to play the odds games. And this is why you have things like societies forming, and stuff. We choose to collectively help each other against the odds. And so on and so forth.

Do you choose to come to play into this life? how is that? Who asked you to play? I'm very curious to know, it looks very serious now.

This seems almost a semantical argument. If they as they were, the species of pre-humans gave birth to humans on one line and chimps on another, but that species only exists now as humans, chimps, and whatever other species, that is actually evolution. However, that original species as that species itself now no longer exists - as that original species. Therefore, guess what? They as that species went extinct. They no longer exist as that prehuman species. That species is gone. Or do you believe that species that gave rise to humans and chimps actually exists as that prehuman species today? If so, I'm more than interested in your thoughts about that.

How they gone while we're their sons? if all of them died and they have no more sons (which are we now), then that is extinction.

A virgin birth is an act of magic, or miracle if you prefer that word. In either case, it's outside natural laws, that makes it "magic".

Why magic? why not genetic mutations that made virgin Mary pregnant (parthenogenesis).

Of course I hear metaphor expressed here, which in a sense is true scientifically. All life is created from dust. All of it. We're all made of stardust! We are made of the various elements cooked and baked in the hot molten earth that rose to the surface, which as live evolved it integrated into bodies made of things like carbon, and iron, calcium, and a list of other "dust from the earth"! It's quite fun that way to take the metaphor literally, and be right! However, this is how ALL life was formed, not just Adam or Jesus, but all of us. That's the scientific view.

No, the quran confirmed that Jesus was conceived in the womb, and one other verse pointed out that both Adam and Jesus
came by the same method.

Actually you didn't ask me for any other verses, i started with the origin of life from water to test how serious you're.

He was born into the grand Casino. Yes, he chose to participate, by choosing Life, by chosing to live.

Doesn't make any sense.

 

[Windwalker]

It's the same illogical thoughts that some Christians use to accept the trinity as a logical thing while it isn't, anyway

You're very wrong as the house is planned and designed and not the work of chance and luck..

Which is my point! It is designed to win because the statistics work in its favor! That's what I've been saying. There is no illogic here. It's facts. They statistically win more than they lose. That's what evolution does. It is the house and it invites all sorts of players to play the games, and in the end, the house wins more than it loses, so they therefore win. What on earth is illogical about that? And how in the name of the Great Blue Sky does that have anything to do with the Trinity? It's not a paradox in the least bit. It's straightforward mathematics.

And do you believe that those players came to the lottery by chance, something is built in them to participate?

The analogy of the lottery is not meant to be carried to extremes here. The point of the analogy is about how the house makes money off the game for those who choose to participate in it. That's how it works. The lottery does not lose money. It makes money. As far as the choice part goes, I said it before. Anyone who chooses to live in this world, is choosing to play the numbers came. That the majority of living things make that choice and why they do is an entirely different direction of discussion we could get into, but serves no purpose here.

Do you choose to come to play into this life? how is that? Who asked you to play? I'm very curious to know, it looks very serious now.

As I said before, everyday I choose to live. I could choose to die as well. I could commit suicide. I have that choice. But the rewards of living is something I, and most living things decide to do.

How they gone while we're their sons? if all of them died and they have no more sons (which are we now), then that is extinction.

My father died recently. He is gone. Even though part of him lives in me, he is no more. When it comes to species, if that species doesn't continue to exist as that species, it's extinct. That's extremely simple to understand. Metaphorically, my father "lives on" in my heart and memory, and even my DNA to some extent, but literally, he's dead.

Why magic? why not genetic mutations that made virgin Mary pregnant (parthenogenesis).

Well, I could argue the why of that with some skill, but I don't see the benefit at the moment.

No, the quran confirmed that Jesus was conceived in the womb, and one other verse pointed out that both Adam and Jesus
came by the same method.

I may swing around to the theological stuff here later, but I just wanted to address this above point about the so-called "randomness" you seem to object to and how in a meta-model, you can see it's actually not "luck" as you put it. I don't believe from an evolutionary game point of view, it's "luck" at all! It's just the best system of how it continues to succeed in "making money", so to speak. Evolution is how God get's things done, in a sense. You see?

 

[FearGod]

Which is my point! It is designed to win because the statistics work in its favor! That's what I've been saying. There is no illogic here. It's facts. They statistically win more than they lose. That's what evolution does. It is the house and it invites all sorts of players to play the games, and in the end, the house wins more than it loses, so they therefore win. What on earth is illogical about that? And how in the name of the Great Blue Sky does that have anything to do with the Trinity? It's not a paradox in the least bit. It's straightforward mathematics.

The house of lottery is planned and designed by humans, it isn't the work of chance, the players may win or lose, but the house itself is designed.
The players themselves planned to play, so it's a planned and a designed process.

Do you mean then that evolution is a planned and a designed game similar to the house of lottery?

The analogy of the lottery is not meant to be carried to extremes here. The point of the analogy is about how the house makes money off the game for those who choose to participate in it. That's how it works. The lottery does not lose money. It makes money. As far as the choice part goes, I said it before. Anyone who chooses to live in this world, is choosing to play the numbers came. That the majority of living things make that choice and why they do is an entirely different direction of discussion we could get into, but serves no purpose here.

But your analogy failed.

As I said before, everyday I choose to live. I could choose to die as well. I could commit suicide. I have that choice. But the rewards of living is something I, and most living things decide to do.

But tell me how you chose to come to this life to participate in it, was it by your choice as the gamblers do?

My father died recently. He is gone. Even though part of him lives in me, he is no more. When it comes to species, if that species doesn't continue to exist as that species, it's extinct. That's extremely simple to understand. Metaphorically, my father "lives on" in my heart and memory, and even my DNA to some extent, but literally, he's dead.

Do you mean we are different creations even though that we were their sons at one point of time?

Well, I could argue the why of that with some skill, but I don't see the benefit at the moment.

Why you don't see the benefit of it at the moment?

I may swing around to the theological stuff here later, but I just wanted to address this above point about the so-called "randomness" you seem to object to and how in a meta-model, you can see it's actually not "luck" as you put it. I don't believe from an evolutionary game point of view, it's "luck" at all! It's just the best system of how it continues to succeed in "making money", so to speak. Evolution is how God get's things done, in a sense. You see?

If you believe in God then you should believe that he managed the environment as well, not only life.

 

[Windwalker]

The house of lottery is planned and designed by humans, it isn't the work of chance, the players may win or lose, but the house itself is designed.

The game is still a game of "chance". It is not designed so John specifically wins, but that the lottery makes money. I'm honestly not sure why this is so challenging to grasp here? Let me try to lay out more clearly if possible:

In the analogy:

• The lottery is like evolution.
• The players are lifeforms
• "Luck" is actually just a matter of statistical odds, mathematics. It's a numbers game (there is no "luck", and what "randomness" there is statistically results in gains).

It does not matter one tick whatsoever is the game is "designed". It is what it is. If God designed the game of evolution, he designed it to be a numbers games, because that is what we see. I'm fine with that. Aren't you? If you are not, then why aren't you? Why can't God have designed the system to use this process of "randomness" to accomplish what we see? It works. It works in playing the lottery.

It does not matter one tick if they players "choose" to play or not, because they are in fact playing by being alive. A designer is irrelevant to this. It's not about the individual players. It's not about humans. It's about life thriving and surviving. That is the purpose of the game. The game is so the house makes money (Life thriving). I'm not sure why this is so difficult to see?

The players themselves planned to play, so it's a planned and a designed process.

Who cares? It's still "random chance" to the players that the odds will strike in their favor and they get the right numbers. Ever play the lottery?

Do you mean then that evolution is a planned and a designed game similar to the house of lottery?

Yes.

But your analogy failed.

No it didn't. You aren't apparently understanding it.

But tell me how you chose to come to this life to participate in it, was it by your choice as the gamblers do?

Again, don't stretch analogies to be 100% identical in every minute detail. That is not the intention. I never claimed that. The point of the analogy was the points I made specifically, and that is valid where I drew analogies. There is no flaw in that. But if you insist on this "choice" to play or not being a factor, which it is not in any case, I have answered that already. I choose to participate in life by not committing suicide. The rewards are worth it. Just like the promise of reward is what drives the gambler (even if in their case it's part of a problem usually - but that is an entirely different discussion I don't care to waste my time on. Gambling for money is not identical to doing our best through choice to survive life).

Do you mean we are different creations even though that we were their sons at one point of time?

We are different species. DNA mapping points to the ancient sea sponge as the first animal life form on this planet, and we all, all species that have ever been are descended from it. That sponge is "Eve" to all life. But I am not a sponge! That sponge species is my 500 billionth great grandmother, and yours too, brother.

Do you want to call each species a separate creation? Okay, but you would want to then say that each individual within each species is also a separate creation. I don't have a problem with that. But if you mean to say each species was independently created at one given point in time by God; gophers on Tuesday, Racoons on Wednesday, Humans on Thursday and the like, then I can't say I'm okay with that.

Why you don't see the benefit of it at the moment?

I'd rather deal with the science aspects of it at first, then getting embroiled in the theological interpretations of ancient religious texts at the moment. That gets way deep and I don't see the value for that exercise at this point until we establish this a little better first.

If you believe in God then you should believe that he managed the environment as well, not only life.

Why? Why is that necessary to believe if you believe in God?

 

[FearGod]

The game is still a game of "chance". It is not designed so John specifically wins, but that the lottery makes money. I'm honestly not sure why this is so challenging to grasp here? Let me try to lay out more clearly if possible:

In the analogy:

• The lottery is like evolution.
• The players are lifeforms
• "Luck" is actually just a matter of statistical odds, mathematics. It's a numbers game (there is no "luck", and what "randomness" there is statistically results in gains).

It does not matter one tick whatsoever is the game is "designed". It is what it is. If God designed the game of evolution, he designed it to be a numbers games, because that is what we see. I'm fine with that. Aren't you? If you are not, then why aren't you? Why can't God have designed the system to use this process of "randomness" to accomplish what we see? It works. It works in playing the lottery.

It does not matter one tick if they players "choose" to play or not, because they are in fact playing by being alive. A designer is irrelevant to this. It's not about the individual players. It's not about humans. It's about life thriving and surviving. That is the purpose of the game. The game is so the house makes money (Life thriving). I'm not sure why this is so difficult to see?

This is the problem, if you believe one thing then nothing will change your mind, the same thing happened
to me when discussing the trinity with some Christians, one of their metaphors is water in 3 states, regardless
of the effort in explaining that their analogy doesn't work but still for them it works and they accused me of not
grasping and not understanding it and that 3 persons can be 1 at one specific time is logical and very understood.

You're neglecting how the players came to be(the life forms) in order for your analogy to work, no it isn't up to you as to accept
one thing and to ignore the other just to make your idea correct, no it can't be, try another one.

Who cares? It's still "random chance" to the players that the odds will strike in their favor and they get the right numbers. Ever play the lottery?

No i didn't, i don't like to lose

Yes.

What about the players? you need the players first, how they came to play in the game of the evolution,
you can't ignore that the players in the lottery came to play, the players weren't the product of randomness,
again you can't accept one thing and neglect the others just for your idea to work.

No it didn't. You aren't apparently understanding it.

I understand it but if you want to believe that it's right then i have nothing to do to change your mind.

Again, don't stretch analogies to be 100% identical in every minute detail. That is not the intention. I never claimed that. The point of the analogy was the points I made specifically, and that is valid where I drew analogies. There is no flaw in that. But if you insist on this "choice" to play or not being a factor, which it is not in any case, I have answered that already. I choose to participate in life by not committing suicide. The rewards are worth it. Just like the promise of reward is what drives the gambler (even if in their case it's part of a problem usually - but that is an entirely different discussion I don't care to waste my time on. Gambling for money is not identical to doing our best through choice to survive life).

It isn't about if you want to stay or to die, but how you came to be, how the players came to life to play.

We are different species. DNA mapping points to the ancient sea sponge as the first animal life form on this planet, and we all, all species that have ever been are descended from it. That sponge is "Eve" to all life. But I am not a sponge! That sponge species is my 500 billionth great grandmother, and yours too, brother.

Do you want to call each species a separate creation? Okay, but you would want to then say that each individual within each species is also a separate creation. I don't have a problem with that. But if you mean to say each species was independently created at one given point in time by God; gophers on Tuesday, Racoons on Wednesday, Humans on Thursday and the like, then I can't say I'm okay with that.

So you believe we're from the CHLCA but we become a different species, right

Why? Why is that necessary to believe if you believe in God?

Of course it's necessary, if God didn't make the environment suitable for life then how evolution will work, or
do you believe the suitable environment happened by randomness while God was just watching?

 

[Windwalker]

This is the problem, if you believe one thing then nothing will change your mind

Well that is a completely false characterization of me! My views have changed dramatically over the years. If someone has a good point, I always listen and consider. But it has to address necessary things, not just ask me to accept it without substantial reason. You'd do best to keep such judgement as this with me a matter for you to wonder and watch, rather than assume and pass false judgement. You miss the mark radically here.

to me when discussing the trinity with some Christians, one of their metaphors is water in 3 states, regardless
of the effort in explaining that their analogy doesn't work but still for them it works and they accused me of not
grasping and not understanding it and that 3 persons can be 1 at one specific time is logical and very understood.

To debate the Trinity doctrine is folly. We're not debating paradoxes here. We're debating the actual science. There is no comparison to be made between these.

You're neglecting how the players came to be(the life forms) in order for your analogy to work, no it isn't up to you as to accept
one thing and to ignore the other just to make your idea correct, no it can't be, try another one.

Ok, why? Why is that necessary. Explain. How does my analogy fall or stand on that?

No i didn't, i don't like to lose

Ever play in the game of love then?

What about the players? you need the players first, how they came to play in the game of the evolution,

alright, fine. The players are the numbers themselves. Some are winning numbers, others are losing numbers. The actual player is God. God is both the house, and the game itself. Life forms are the winning and loosing numbers. And yes, God chose to play the game.

you can't ignore that the players in the lottery came to play, the players weren't the product of randomness,
again you can't accept one thing and neglect the others just for your idea to work.

Since I'm "tweaking" the analogy here to address the players directly because you can't seem to see past them to the actual point being made, the appearance of winning numbers is "random" in a sense, but statistically probable. That the human winning numbers came up, is a matter of statistic probability, at that time, at that place, etc. The odds of human life forms emerging during the Jurassic Period, would have been statistically improbable because of gigantic predators that wouldn't allow mammals to evolve far enough to create humans. Later in history, as the "rules of the game" changed, there were no longer giant dino pieces on the board, the probability of mammals evolving to the point humans were possible, the odds went up.

And on and on the analogy can go. Just let me know which piece you need me to talk to specifically so I can make the analogy larger than I originally set out to make. Again, but please only do so if you think it actually has value to the end argument (I'm not sure how this one did).

I understand it but if you want to believe that it's right then i have nothing to do to change your mind.

You know, actually it just occured to me, that maybe your "belief" that I will just not change my mind if shown evidence, is actually a projection of yourself on me? Do you think that is possible here? It certainly doesn't describe me, so why do you assume I'm thus and so? Projection is what we put on others what we are doing ourselves because we don't want to face that truth in ourselves. It never has to do with the other person. Fact don't fit that.

It isn't about if you want to stay or to die, but how you came to be, how the players came to life to play.

Why? Why is that a factor in my analogy? Again though, I've refined the analogy now to include the players. To reiterate, the players are the actually the numbers in the game. We don't have a choice in being put into the game. The choice we have is whether we want to be a number, or not. "To be, or not to be? That is the question."

So you believe we're from the CHLCA but we become a different species, right

Yes. Homo Sapien is a different species. Do you question its the same species? On what basis? What science?

Of course it's necessary, if God didn't make the environment suitable for life then how evolution will work, or
do you believe the suitable environment happened by randomness while God was just watching?

Do you believe humans were intended to be exactly what we are? If so then you have injected a belief into science that science does not support. Humans are in fact quite "badly" designed, if you want to think about it. We are not optimal by any means! We are "good enough" to survive. If God directly had his hand in manipulating the environment to create a "perfect species", or something like that, he frankly good have done better, if that idea about how God does this is valid. I don't consider that a valid idea about God, because the data simply does not support that.

However, I believe God creates us (note the present continuous tense there). He creates through evolution. What emerges, is what emerges. But I do not, and cannot accept based on what we actually know about the natural world, that humans as humans were specifically designed to be specifically what we are. I believe that God "wills" Life, and that Spirit is the Breath of Live that moves through the universe, moving the winds and waves to create from its womb. And this process is natural, and what emerges, you could say both surprises and delights God!

I'll leave it at that for the moment.

 

[FearGod]

Yes. Homo Sapien is a different species. Do you question its the same species? On what basis? What science?

And the quran agrees with you.

(6:133)
Your Lord is Free of all wants; (He is) the Lord of Mercy. If He wants, He can wipe you out, and have another people _ whomever He wants _ succeed you, just as He raised you from the genes of a different nation.

 

[Milton Platt]

A team of British researchers have “confirmed” that consciousness can go on when someone dies but the study also uncovered some disturbing aspects of the so-called afterlife.
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/weird-news/scientists-finally-prove-life-after-7989503

Do you believe in the afterlife or still in doubt?

It appears you cannot read the article without subscribing and I get enough spam already. This appears to be a cheap rag, not a reliable news source. Can you cough up the names of the researchers and even better (I know it is a tall order) did they actually publish in a peer reviewed journal? What is their field of study?

Is this just a "near death" thing? If they revived a person who has been dead for at least three days (takes at least that long for all activity at the cellular level to stop) then I would be impressed......and yet, it has absolutely no bearing on immaterial souls.

 

[McBell]

It appears you cannot read the article without subscribing and I get enough spam already. This appears to be a cheap rag, not a reliable news source. Can you cough up the names of the researchers and even better (I know it is a tall order) did they actually publish in a peer reviewed journal? What is their field of study?

Is this just a "near death" thing? If they revived a person who has been dead for at least three days (takes at least that long for all activity at the cellular level to stop) then I would be impressed......and yet, it has absolutely no bearing on immaterial souls.

the only name used is:

"Head researcher Dr Sam Parnia"​

 

[Windwalker]

And the quran agrees with you.

(6:133)
Your Lord is Free of all wants; (He is) the Lord of Mercy. If He wants, He can wipe you out, and have another people _ whomever He wants _ succeed you, just as He raised you from the genes of a different nation.

Whoa... are you trying to say those of other ethnic backgrounds are not the same species? This verse is about them being intermarried with other peoples. "A different nation", is a human society. What exactly is it you believe here?

 

[Acim]

A tad off topic from what's being discussed in recent pages (though certainly not far off that topic) and is me quoting something from p. 4 of this thread.

I'm not doubting the personal value to these experiences at all. To think that would be to be adding something to my argument that I haven"t said.
I'm simply suggesting that the amount of mystical, impactful, transcendental, or spiritual feelings associated with them (or anything else for that matter) are a direct result of the brain doing it's thing, and little more. It is the brain, we agree, that is creating the ride that we are along for, as you put it, even if you don't agree with how much control we have over it.

This is true of anything, not just NDEs. If you look at your favorite or most moving work of art, there is something seemingly transcendent about it; something that moves you personally in a way that reminds you perhaps of who you are, or of cherished memories of childhood, or of the greater version of humanity that you long for... whatever you want to say here. But those sentiments that you have towards that work of art, or towards that personal memory or experience, or towards that NDE that was forever life-changing for you, are not universal. They're something personal and a direct result of your unique set of life experiences which have formed your personality. They're a result of an almost infinite number of variables that went into making you the person that you are right now, beginning the moment that your brain first started processing data and ending at the period of this sentence. This is true of you, of me, and of any other test subject in any other test at any time in history. What you and I view as reality is entirely dependent on those variables, and on the health and functionality of our brain. When you remove those factors, or change those variables, everything else changes along with them. You are not you without everything that has led up to this point, right? You might be like you - but you wouldn't be you. Remove the health of the brain, and you, similarly, are not you any more than I would be I.

I'm always amazed these types of things are chosen to make this point rather than 'science itself.' I've seen many of scientific types enamored with science. Expressing adoration, even leaning mysticism with certain mathematical formulas. But that's either rarely or never brought up with this sort of assertion. Such that the above could say: those sentiments that you have towards science are not universal. They're something personal and a direct result of your unique set of life experiences which have formed your personality. Or like the first paragraph is conveying, you're brain is doing science, and you're just along for the ride, even if you don't agree with how much control we have over it.

It's odd to me that science doesn't include itself in such assertions, or more like fans of science do not. Like when I see neurological stuff that shows what parts of the brain light up with regards to certain thoughts, I'd like to see how that is for 'scientific thoughts' or even neurological experiments. Is the same thought of 'methodology for neurological experiment' reside in the brain near the portion that says we have to push a little harder when we go number 2? Or what? Where's that information? Why isn't that front and center?

But alas, I say all this rhetorically, because I think we all know why science doesn't investigate itself in these ways, thinking it has transcended (previous) human understanding and is higher intelligence than whatever else we might do with our brains/thinking when not doing science.

 

[FearGod]

Whoa... are you trying to say those of other ethnic backgrounds are not the same species? This verse is about them being intermarried with other peoples. "A different nation", is a human society. What exactly is it you believe here?

The verse is about the human creation, it isn't about ethnic groups, where did it say ethnic group?

 

[Windwalker]

The verse is about the human creation, it isn't about ethnic groups, where did it say ethnic group?

That's odd, I don't hear a creation story in there. He's speaking to a people who he could wipe out and replace with another people, reminding them of how they were raised from other nations. I'm just reading the words here, "If He wants, He can wipe you out, and have another people _ whomever He wants _ succeed you, just as He raised you from the genes of a different nation." "He raised you from the genes of a different nation". "Peoples, nations....", I don't get the Genesis story in this you say is there. Where?

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

Is this just a "near death" thing? If they revived a person who has been dead for at least three days (takes at least that long for all activity at the cellular level to stop) then I would be impressed......and yet, it has absolutely no bearing on immaterial souls.

Ah my own covers that then, MVA, massive brain trauma, basal fracture, penetration of frontal lobes
by steering column, right zygoma exploded out from pressure, 40% of brain gone...
Body kept alive by machines for transplants to others, pronounced Brain Dead for 4 days till parents
arrived and refused using my body as transplant donor, machines turned off, declared dead and
awoke as i was wheeled to morgue..... n-DE during that time ... note Brain Dead 4 days ...

 

[FearGod]

That's odd, I don't hear a creation story in there. He's speaking to a people who he could wipe out and replace with another people, reminding them of how they were raised from other nations. I'm just reading the words here, "If He wants, He can wipe you out, and have another people _ whomever He wants _ succeed you, just as He raised you from the genes of a different nation." "He raised you from the genes of a different nation". "Peoples, nations....", I don't get the Genesis story in this you say is there. Where?

How God will wipe them from earth and then make other people from their own genes?,
God didn't say the genes will be from other humans but from the wiped ones
Is it really hard to understand that God will produce a new humans by using the genes of
the previous ones?

 

[jonathan180iq]

A tad off topic from what's being discussed in recent pages (though certainly not far off that topic) and is me quoting something from p. 4 of this thread.

I'm always amazed these types of things are chosen to make this point rather than 'science itself.' I've seen many of scientific types enamored with science. Expressing adoration, even leaning mysticism with certain mathematical formulas. But that's either rarely or never brought up with this sort of assertion. Such that the above could say: those sentiments that you have towards science are not universal. They're something personal and a direct result of your unique set of life experiences which have formed your personality. Or like the first paragraph is conveying, you're brain is doing science, and you're just along for the ride, even if you don't agree with how much control we have over it.

It's odd to me that science doesn't include itself in such assertions, or more like fans of science do not. Like when I see neurological stuff that shows what parts of the brain light up with regards to certain thoughts, I'd like to see how that is for 'scientific thoughts' or even neurological experiments. Is the same thought of 'methodology for neurological experiment' reside in the brain near the portion that says we have to push a little harder when we go number 2? Or what? Where's that information? Why isn't that front and center?

But alas, I say all this rhetorically, because I think we all know why science doesn't investigate itself in these ways, thinking it has transcended (previous) human understanding and is higher intelligence than whatever else we might do with our brains/thinking when not doing science.

You've made a pretty big mistake in assuming that what applies to the hypothetical dualist in my scenario does not equally apply to myself. Unless you're reading this with quite a bit of bias, I don't see how you could come to that conclusion.

 

[Windwalker]

How God will wipe them from earth and then make other people from their own genes?,
God didn't say the genes will be from other humans but from the wiped ones
Is it really hard to understand that God will produce a new humans by using the genes of
the previous ones?

I'm honestly trying to see how you think this verse is talking about the human species as a whole, or that it has anything at all to do with creation. It simply does not from what I'm reading. I even read the previous and following 10 verses and nowhere in there does it support a creation story of humankind. Rather, the entire passage is about unblievers in cities, and how they can be replaced by other peoples of other descendents just as they were.

It's like the exact same thing Jesus said about the Jews claiming Abraham as their father, saying that because they failed in obeying God, God will raise up a new people from foreign lands (people of another tongue, is how it's described) to replace them! It's not different, in the words, and in the context. You cannot just simply rip the verse out of context and inject meaning that has no place in it.

Please show me where you read "creation story" in this context and where my understanding isn't more valid contextually:

And leave what is apparent of sin and what is concealed thereof. Indeed, those who earn [blame for] sin will be recompensed for that which they used to commit.

And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. And indeed do the devils inspire their allies [among men] to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be associators [of others with Him].

And is one who was dead and We gave him life and made for him light by which to walk among the people like one who is in darkness, never to emerge therefrom? Thus it has been made pleasing to the disbelievers that which they were doing.

And thus We have placed within every city the greatest of its criminals to conspire therein. But they conspire not except against themselves, and they perceive [it] not.

And when a sign comes to them, they say, "Never will we believe until we are given like that which was given to the messengers of Allah ." Allah is most knowing of where He places His message. There will afflict those who committed crimes debasement before Allah and severe punishment for what they used to conspire.

So whoever Allah wants to guide - He expands his breast to [contain] Islam; and whoever He wants to misguide - He makes his breast tight and constricted as though he were climbing into the sky. Thus does Allah place defilement upon those who do not believe.

And this is the path of your Lord, [leading] straight. We have detailed the verses for a people who remember.

For them will be the Home of Peace with their Lord. And He will be their protecting friend because of what they used to do.

And [mention, O Muhammad], the Day when He will gather them together [and say], "O company of jinn, you have [misled] many of mankind." And their allies among mankind will say, "Our Lord, some of us made use of others, and we have [now] reached our term, which you appointed for us." He will say, "The Fire is your residence, wherein you will abide eternally, except for what Allah wills. Indeed, your Lord is Wise and Knowing."

And thus will We make some of the wrongdoers allies of others for what they used to earn.

"O company of jinn and mankind, did there not come to you messengers from among you, relating to you My verses and warning you of the meeting of this Day of yours?" They will say, "We bear witness against ourselves"; and the worldly life had deluded them, and they will bear witness against themselves that they were disbelievers.

That is because your Lord would not destroy the cities for wrongdoing while their people were unaware.

And for all are degrees from what they have done. And your Lord is not unaware of what they do.

And your Lord is the Free of need, the possessor of mercy. If He wills, he can do away with you and give succession after you to whomever He wills, just as He produced you from the descendants of another people.

Indeed, what you are promised is coming, and you will not cause failure [to Allah ].

Say, "O my people, work according to your position; [for] indeed, I am working. And you are going to know who will have succession in the home. Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.

And the polytheists assign to Allah from that which He created of crops and livestock a share and say, "This is for Allah ," by their claim, " and this is for our partners [associated with Him]." But what is for their "partners" does not reach Allah , while what is for Allah - this reaches their "partners." Evil is that which they rule.

And likewise, to many of the polytheists their partners have made [to seem] pleasing the killing of their children in order to bring about their destruction and to cover them with confusion in their religion. And if Allah had willed, they would not have done so. So leave them and that which they invent.

And they say, "These animals and crops are forbidden; no one may eat from them except whom we will," by their claim. And there are those [camels] whose backs are forbidden [by them] and those upon which the name of Allah is not mentioned - [all of this] an invention of untruth about Him. He will punish them for what they were inventing.

And they say, "What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is [born] dead, then all of them have shares therein." He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing.

Those will have lost who killed their children in foolishness without knowledge and prohibited what Allah had provided for them, inventing untruth about Allah . They have gone astray and were not [rightly] guided.​

But again, this is precisely why I did not want to go down this road, debating interpretations of scriptures! We'll end up spending the whole time debating that, which is ultimately fruitless, IMO. EVEN IF, it says what you imagine it does, the science does not support you. It needs to if you are going to claim you are accepting the science. You are not allowed to change the science to suit your theologies.

 

[FearGod]

I'm honestly trying to see how you think this verse is talking about the human species as a whole, or that it has anything at all to do with creation. It simply does not from what I'm reading. I even read the previous and following 10 verses and nowhere in there does it support a creation story of humankind. Rather, the entire passage is about unblievers in cities, and how they can be replaced by other peoples of other descendents just as they were.

It's like the exact same thing Jesus said about the Jews claiming Abraham as their father, saying that because they failed in obeying God, God will raise up a new people from foreign lands (people of another tongue, is how it's described) to replace them! It's not different, in the words, and in the context. You cannot just simply rip the verse out of context and inject meaning that has no place in it.

Please show me where you read "creation story" in this context and where my understanding isn't more valid contextually:

And leave what is apparent of sin and what is concealed thereof. Indeed, those who earn [blame for] sin will be recompensed for that which they used to commit.

And do not eat of that upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned, for indeed, it is grave disobedience. And indeed do the devils inspire their allies [among men] to dispute with you. And if you were to obey them, indeed, you would be associators [of others with Him].

And is one who was dead and We gave him life and made for him light by which to walk among the people like one who is in darkness, never to emerge therefrom? Thus it has been made pleasing to the disbelievers that which they were doing.

And thus We have placed within every city the greatest of its criminals to conspire therein. But they conspire not except against themselves, and they perceive [it] not.

And when a sign comes to them, they say, "Never will we believe until we are given like that which was given to the messengers of Allah ." Allah is most knowing of where He places His message. There will afflict those who committed crimes debasement before Allah and severe punishment for what they used to conspire.

So whoever Allah wants to guide - He expands his breast to [contain] Islam; and whoever He wants to misguide - He makes his breast tight and constricted as though he were climbing into the sky. Thus does Allah place defilement upon those who do not believe.

And this is the path of your Lord, [leading] straight. We have detailed the verses for a people who remember.

For them will be the Home of Peace with their Lord. And He will be their protecting friend because of what they used to do.

And [mention, O Muhammad], the Day when He will gather them together [and say], "O company of jinn, you have [misled] many of mankind." And their allies among mankind will say, "Our Lord, some of us made use of others, and we have [now] reached our term, which you appointed for us." He will say, "The Fire is your residence, wherein you will abide eternally, except for what Allah wills. Indeed, your Lord is Wise and Knowing."

And thus will We make some of the wrongdoers allies of others for what they used to earn.

"O company of jinn and mankind, did there not come to you messengers from among you, relating to you My verses and warning you of the meeting of this Day of yours?" They will say, "We bear witness against ourselves"; and the worldly life had deluded them, and they will bear witness against themselves that they were disbelievers.

That is because your Lord would not destroy the cities for wrongdoing while their people were unaware.

And for all are degrees from what they have done. And your Lord is not unaware of what they do.

And your Lord is the Free of need, the possessor of mercy. If He wills, he can do away with you and give succession after you to whomever He wills, just as He produced you from the descendants of another people.

Indeed, what you are promised is coming, and you will not cause failure [to Allah ].

Say, "O my people, work according to your position; [for] indeed, I am working. And you are going to know who will have succession in the home. Indeed, the wrongdoers will not succeed.

And the polytheists assign to Allah from that which He created of crops and livestock a share and say, "This is for Allah ," by their claim, " and this is for our partners [associated with Him]." But what is for their "partners" does not reach Allah , while what is for Allah - this reaches their "partners." Evil is that which they rule.

And likewise, to many of the polytheists their partners have made [to seem] pleasing the killing of their children in order to bring about their destruction and to cover them with confusion in their religion. And if Allah had willed, they would not have done so. So leave them and that which they invent.

And they say, "These animals and crops are forbidden; no one may eat from them except whom we will," by their claim. And there are those [camels] whose backs are forbidden [by them] and those upon which the name of Allah is not mentioned - [all of this] an invention of untruth about Him. He will punish them for what they were inventing.

And they say, "What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is [born] dead, then all of them have shares therein." He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing.

Those will have lost who killed their children in foolishness without knowledge and prohibited what Allah had provided for them, inventing untruth about Allah . They have gone astray and were not [rightly] guided.​

But again, this is precisely why I did not want to go down this road, debating interpretations of scriptures! We'll end up spending the whole time debating that, which is ultimately fruitless, IMO. EVEN IF, it says what you imagine it does, the science does not support you. It needs to if you are going to claim you are accepting the science. You are not allowed to change the science to suit your theologies.

I don't understand why you need a connection between the previous verses and the next ones, many verses
are what it is, for example verse (6:125) is telling that climbing into the sky will let your breast feels tight

So whoever Allah wants to guide - He expands his breast to [contain] Islam; and whoever He wants to misguide - He makes his breast tight and constricted as though he were climbing into the sky. Thus does Allah place defilement upon those who do not believe.

That being said, the verse (6:133) is addressing the human being, not a specific race, not a specific religion,
but our species, the human being.

 

[Windwalker]

I don't understand why you need a connection between the previous verses and the next ones, many verses
are what it is, for example verse (6:125) is telling that climbing into the sky will let your breast feels tight

If you were to take just one sentence of mine and ignore the context in which it was said, you would fail to get the meaning. In fact, I might rightly accuse you of misquoting me if you said I was saying something which the context did not support. This is common sense.

Are these verses in the quran nothing but standalone "sayings"? If so, then again, how do you get that out of it? When I first read it isolated, I sure didn't get that out of it. I got out of it what I thought it said and shared with you. When I then later referenced the whole passage, assuming it was the context I was missing and that you might have a point, I didn't find anything to support your view. On the contrary, contextually it supported what I said from what I was reading both before and after the verses.

But again, we're straying off course here quibbling about how to interpret ancient literature (something I'm familiar with, BTW). My point remains, even if the quran explicitly said something that science contradicts, you have three choices:

1. Acknowledge your interpretation isn't correct.
2. Admit the quran is wrong and accept the science.
3. Insist the quran and your interpretation of it is correct, and reject the science because the evidence doesn't agree with your beliefs.

Which of the above three are you choosing?