Some Important Facts for the Religious (and Everybody Else)

[Heyo]

There [is] no evidence that any consciousness can function without a living, physical brain.

@sun rise, @dybmh, @Twilight Hue

I don't get your objections. What is your evidence? (And no, the so-called "reincarnation evidence" isn't evidence for disembodied consciousness.)

 

[Heyo]

You are free to have your views and opinions
Just as religious people are free to believe what they do.

You have a right to your own opinion - but you don't have a right to your own facts.

 

[We Never Know]

@sun rise, @dybmh, @Twilight Hue

I don't get your objections. What is your evidence? (And no, the so-called "reincarnation evidence" isn't evidence for disembodied consciousness.)

This may be off topic but maybe not.

My point is even trees show regonition of their off spring. So maybe there is more to trees, consciousness or even life that we haven't even figured out yet.

A tree doesn't have a brain or consciousness as far as we know. But yet..

"So we set about an experiment, and we grew mother trees with kin and stranger's seedlings. And it turns out they do recognize their kin. Mother trees colonize their kin with bigger mycorrhizal networks. They send them more carbon below ground"

Trees Talk to Each Other and Recognize Their Offspring.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You have a right to your own opinion - but you don't have a right to your own facts.

The strange about socalled facts is, they change when science discover new knowledge about the topic. So facts aren't that reliable either.

Religious belief are based on faith and belief in a teaching. But that does not make it less valuable for those who believe in it.

In the same time, some people do not believe in faith, and that is perefctly ok too.

 

[Harel13]

*Mod Post: Thread moved to General Religious Debates*​

 

[Heyo]

This may be off topic but maybe not.

My point is even trees show regonition of their off spring. So maybe there is more to trees, consciousness or even life that we haven't even figured out yet.

A tree doesn't have a brain or consciousness as far as we know. But yet..

"So we set about an experiment, and we grew mother trees with kin and stranger's seedlings. And it turns out they do recognize their kin. Mother trees colonize their kin with bigger mycorrhizal networks. They send them more carbon below ground"

Trees Talk to Each Other and Recognize Their Offspring.

I don't think it's off topic.
We run into the "hard problem of consciousness", that nobody has an accepted definition of consciousness. And if we stretch the meaning of "brain" in the same way, that problem may be solved.
But I think it would be best to change the wording of the OP (without taking away too much meaning).
I'd formulate it thus:

There no evidence that any consciousness can function without a physical substrate.

@Jagella, would you be OK with that change?

 

[Heyo]

The strange about socalled facts is, they change when science discover new knowledge about the topic. So facts aren't that reliable either.

No, the facts don't change.
But admittedly what @Jagella has presented here are not the facts but the theories that arose from them.
Technically we don't know if the universe is 13.8 ± 0.5 billion years old. We only know that starlight is red-shifted dependent of the distance of the stars and based on that fact we can extrapolate the age of the universe.
We may learn through additional data that our extrapolation isn't accurate but that doesn't take away the fact of the red-shift.

 

[danieldemol]

Psychology Today - Evaluating the Evidence for Reincarnation

Key points:

• There are many cases of young children who report very specific details of an apparent past life, which are later verified.
• Some claim that children's reports of past lives could be the result of fraud, imagination, or embellishment.
• One striking case of past-life recall is Ryan Hammons, who made 55 very specific statements about a previous life that were verified.

Research in this area was pioneered by Dr. Ian Stevenson, a psychiatrist at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, who spent much of his career collecting and examining such cases. Typically, between the age of 2 and 4 (with a mean age of 35 months) such children start talking about their previous life, often speaking about the events that led up to their death, and sometimes using the present tense as if their previous life was still continuing. In some cases, Stevenson was able to identify the person the child claimed to be and to verify the information by speaking to relatives of the deceased (1).

Since Stevenson’s death, other researchers have followed his lead. Now around 2500 reports of children’s past-life memories have been studied (2).

All in all, this evidence makes me feel that I have no choice but to accept that reincarnation is real. As a scientist, I feel obliged to revise my views in the face of evidence.

Steve Taylor Ph.D.

(1) Stevenson, I,. (1980). Twenty Cases Suggestive Of Reincarnation. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press

(2) 'Fifty Years of Research.' Fifty Years of Research - Division of Perceptual Studies

Regarding Ian Stevenson, 'critics, particularly the philosophers C.T.K. Chari (1909–1993) and Paul Edwards (1923–2004), raised a number of issues, including claims that the children or parents interviewed by Stevenson had deceived him, that he had asked them leading questions, that he had often worked through translators who believed what the interviewees were saying, and that his conclusions were undermined by confirmation bias, where cases not supportive of his hypothesis were not presented as counting against it.[8]'
Source:
Ian Stevenson - Wikipedia

I don't know about the "research" of Steve Taylor, but it would be interesting to see what academic skeptics who review his work have to say. I guess time will tell whether his research is more rigorous than that of Dr Stevenson.

In my opinion.

 

[Augustus]

The creation stories in Genesis 1-2 are taken from Babylonian mythology.

This is not a fact. It is a hypothesis.

The creation stories in Genesis contain elements that reflect features/tropes found in other regional traditions and may reflect direct influence, a common predecessor or emergence in a common cultural environment.

There is not enough evidence to state B is definitely taken from A as a matter of fact.

 

[blü 2]

The oldest religion practiced today is Hinduism.

Unless it's the set of beliefs around the Rainbow Serpent and accompanying stories, in a variety of forms among the aboriginal clans of Australia. I understand there's evidence for this dating back (from memory) 5000 years.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No, the facts don't change.
But admittedly what @Jagella has presented here are not the facts but the theories that arose from them.
Technically we don't know if the universe is 13.8 ± 0.5 billion years old. We only know that starlight is red-shifted dependent of the distance of the stars and based on that fact we can extrapolate the age of the universe.
We may learn through additional data that our extrapolation isn't accurate but that doesn't take away the fact of the red-shift.

I can't take away what science found
Nor can i take away what wisdom are found in religious teaching

 

[Hockeycowboy]

1. The observable cosmos is 13.6 billion years old and has evolved into its present form.
2. The earth is 4.6 billion years old and along with the rest of the solar system formed under gravity from a cloud of dust and gas in space.
3. Not only is there no evidence that any consciousness can function without a living, physical brain, it is impossible to do so.
4. Humans and chimpanzees have a common ancestor, and we split off from that ancestor six million years ago in Africa.
5. Prehistoric religion goes back at least thirty thousand years.
6. Historic religion started about five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia and Egypt.
7. The oldest religion practiced today is Hinduism.
8. The creation stories in Genesis 1-2 are taken from Babylonian mythology.
9. No religious or spiritual healer has ever been proved to have genuine healing powers although many of them have been exposed as frauds.

There are many more such facts, but my point is that if you know what's going on, then you know better than to believe what religion claims.

There are many more such facts, but my point is that if you know what's going on, then you know better than to believe what religion claims.

^^ @Dan From Smithville , this is what I’m talking about. I’ll say it again...the scientific literature is full of philosophical jargon, using suppositions as “probably”, “suggests”, “likely”, “possibly”, etc. (which @shunyadragon stated “does no work”

In the science of evolution 'possibly' does no work.

)

Yet, here it is…these ‘possibly’s have achieved the status of “fact.”

Please tell me, @Jagella…while we understand how gravity keeps the planets in their marvelous orbits…how did it originally *set* them in their established paths?

What processes could accomplish that?

For that matter…do we know how life began? Since you think it’s been established that natural processes started life, please share those facts.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

A tree doesn't have a brain or consciousness as far as we know. But yet..

"So we set about an experiment, and we grew mother trees with kin and stranger's seedlings. And it turns out they do recognize their kin. Mother trees colonize their kin with bigger mycorrhizal networks. They send them more carbon below ground"

Trees Talk to Each Other and Recognize Their Offspring.

That is fascinating!
But it’s probably rather due to some genetic process or trigger, which enables them to detect their closer kin.
Still very informative & fascinating.

 

[firedragon]

1. The observable cosmos is 13.6 billion years old and has evolved into its present form.
2. The earth is 4.6 billion years old and along with the rest of the solar system formed under gravity from a cloud of dust and gas in space.
3. There no evidence that any consciousness can function without a living, physical brain.
4. Humans and chimpanzees have a common ancestor, and we split off from that ancestor six million years ago in Africa.
5. Prehistoric religion goes back at least thirty thousand years.
6. Historic religion started about five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia and Egypt.
7. The oldest religion practiced today is Hinduism.
8. The creation stories in Genesis 1-2 are taken from Babylonian mythology.
9. No religious or spiritual healer has ever been proved to have genuine healing powers although many of them have been exposed as frauds.

There are many more such facts, but my point is that if you know what's going on, then you know better than to believe what religion claims.

1. Its true that scientific investigation has given an estimation of the universe. So do you believer the "cosmos" as you termed it has a beginning?
2. Its true that earth has a certain age. But are you sure its a fact? I mean 100% knowledge?
3. Two points prior to this you were speaking of scientific findings. Now, you are speaking of "no evidence". Are you sure no evidence means evidence?
4. theoretically humans and chimps have a common ancestor. But are you sure its "absolute fact"? Is that how science works?
5. Are you sure prehistoric religions go back 30k years? Is that an "absolute fact"?
6. Are you sure "Historic religion STARTED 5k years ago"? Is that "absolute fact"?
7. Are you sure the oldest religion is hinduism? Is that "absolute fact"?
8. Are you sure genesis copied from Gilgamesh? Is that an "absolute fact"? They also didnt have a common ancestor?
9. Why is spiritual healers in this equation?

Is this your standard? Lets see how you explain each position in your OP as absolute fact and explain why spiritual hears is such a big deal for your anti religious position.

Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

There is no scientific proof of reincarnation.

In my opinion.

Daniel. Where is the scientific proof for the existence of anything beyond the physical sciences? While you believe in extra physical "something", in what world are you asking others for scientific evidences for their beliefs?

That is the definition of hypocrisy. Unless you could provide scientific evidence for your beliefs that you believe without any evidence.

 

[exchemist]

1. The observable cosmos is 13.6 billion years old and has evolved into its present form.
2. The earth is 4.6 billion years old and along with the rest of the solar system formed under gravity from a cloud of dust and gas in space.
3. There no evidence that any consciousness can function without a living, physical brain.
4. Humans and chimpanzees have a common ancestor, and we split off from that ancestor six million years ago in Africa.
5. Prehistoric religion goes back at least thirty thousand years.
6. Historic religion started about five thousand years ago in Mesopotamia and Egypt.
7. The oldest religion practiced today is Hinduism.
8. The creation stories in Genesis 1-2 are taken from Babylonian mythology.
9. No religious or spiritual healer has ever been proved to have genuine healing powers although many of them have been exposed as frauds.

There are many more such facts, but my point is that if you know what's going on, then you know better than to believe what religion claims.

Almost all the points on your list are fully accepted by mainstream Christianity, so I'm not sure what this achieves.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That is fascinating!
But it’s probably rather due to some genetic process or trigger, which enables them to detect their closer kin.
Still very informative & fascinating.

There is an interesting talk by Abdul'baha that explains the 5 levels of Spirit that permeates our reality.

The first level is the Vegetable Spirit, it is an interesting talk. There is a short summary here if interested.

Degrees of Spirit | The Human Soul | The Life of the Spirit | What Bahá’ís Believe

Regards Tony

 

[Heyo]

Almost all the points on your list are fully accepted by mainstream Christianity, so I'm not sure what this achieves.

Your point should be added as #10.

I guess the intended audience is more at the fringes of the religions.

 

[firedragon]

There is an interesting talk by Abdul'baha that explains the 5 levels of Spirit that permeates our reality.

The first level is the Vegetable Spirit, it is an interesting talk. There is a short summary here if interested.

Degrees of Spirit | The Human Soul | The Life of the Spirit | What Bahá’ís Believe

Regards Tony

Hmm. I checked it out. Its not a talk by Abdul Baha, but someone else based on Abdul Baha. So what you said is a little false.

Also why is it that in the Qur'an whch you are bound to believe is Gods word without any choice, never say anything about the spirit being an intermediary between God and his creation?

Is not that kind of strange?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Hmm. I checked it out. Its not a talk by Abdul Baha, but someone else based on Abdul Baha. So what you said is a little false.

I offered there was a talk and then offered a link to a shorter summary.

You have just read it incorrectly.

Regards Tony