Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Who raised Jesus from the dead?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Well, that's just the thing isn't it? I don't believe "finite knowledge" is an essential part of being human. It has never been part of my criteria for what constitutes human nature.
    I am aware of that. It cannot be and hold to the idea of the hypostatic union - it would create a contradiction. That's what this discussion is all about.

    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Well, that's not what's being said at all. It's not "can you accept the tenets of Christianity if you accept the tenets of Christianity?", but rather "Does this small detail make sense set against the backdrop of Christianity as a whole?".
    For me, the question is, "does this concept make rational sense."

    Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
    Well, if I was "excluding the conflicts from [my] definition of 'human nature'" simply to get around issue you would have a point, but the thing is that I've never considered "finite knowledge" to be an essential part of human nature. It's not like I'm simply excluding it to win the argument.
    And yet - that's essentially what has happened. I don't think you're being dishonest, Chrawnus - I just think you're begging the question. Your description of "human nature" explicitly excludes aspects that are, IMO, very much part of the human experience and the human person - and it just happens to make room for your theological beliefs.

    I don't think you can posit that a finite being (I guess you say "created being") can be the repository of an infinity. It makes no sense. Our very being is an exercise in finitude. It is not separable from the human person.

    On that we appear to disagree. I'm not sure there is an evident way to resolve that disagreement.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      It is begging the question, because it assumes that the mind must be bound by human physiology.
      Then it would be on you to show that it is not. The evidence available to me shows mind inextricably linked to brain. Alter the brain - and you alter the mind. Destroy the brain and you destroy the mind (and the life with it). We see this repeated over and over and over again throughout nature. Mind without brain is the stuff of fancy and fantasy.

      But if you have an avenue for showing that mind can exist without brain - then by all means present it. I tend to go where the evidence takes me.
      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

      Comment


      • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        I'll leave the last word to you.
        Just sayin'.
        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
        sigpic
        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

        Comment


        • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Just sayin'.
          Yeah - my bad.

          I have too many discussions going, and I keep forgetting which one's I've disconnected from and which I have not. I probably should just unsubscribe when I say that - but then I don't see if someone else has posted and I don't read any of the follow-on posts. I do make an effort to read the follow-on comments, but then I forget if I've withdrawn and end up responding again.

          Not sure how to solve that. I suppose the easy way would be to just stop saying, "last word to you" and just stop responding when I have found the discussion repetitive or going nowhere. Maybe that's what I'll do.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
            Well, that's not what's being said at all. It's not "can you accept the tenets of Christianity if you accept the tenets of Christianity?", but rather "Does this small detail make sense set against the backdrop of Christianity as a whole?"
            It's all part of the process of evaluating the truth of a worldview. There are two steps: First, is the worldview internally consistent? In other words, if we assume its essential tenets are true, does this create a contradiction? The second step is testing its external consistency. In other words, do the essential tenets contradict what we see in the world around us?

            Atheists, in general, have their minds closed like a steel trap and are therefore incapable of taking the first step.
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              Then it would be on you to show that it is not. The evidence available to me shows mind inextricably linked to brain. Alter the brain - and you alter the mind. Destroy the brain and you destroy the mind (and the life with it). We see this repeated over and over and over again throughout nature. Mind without brain is the stuff of fancy and fantasy.

              But if you have an avenue for showing that mind can exist without brain - then by all means present it. I tend to go where the evidence takes me.
              This, too, begs the question. Suppose you have a music player attached to speaker. You can damage the speaker and cause the music to sound distorted, or you can destroy the speaker and prevent the music from being heard. And yet the music still exists even if the device through which it is channeled is damaged or destroyed. So the question is, is the brain the source of the mind, or merely the conduit? Science can not answer that question, so I'm not sure what evidence you're basing your conclusion on.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                This, too, begs the question. Suppose you have a music player attached to speaker. You can damage the speaker and cause the music to sound distorted, or you can destroy the speaker and prevent the music from being heard. And yet the music still exists even if the device through which it is channeled is damaged or destroyed. So the question is, is the brain the source of the mind, or merely the conduit?
                As best I can tell - the source. The music analogy is poorly constructed. The brain is not how mind is "expressed." We do that with our bodies. Our conscious choices are reflected in our activities. When they are not - there is no external manifestation of "mind," yet mind remains. We know that from our internal sense of mind. And we know that by a multitude of experiments that link the physical actions of "brain" to the experiences of "mind."

                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Science can not answer that question, so I'm not sure what evidence you're basing your conclusion on.
                Science can "answer" that question to the same degree it can "answer" any question: it can provide evidence and a "best explanation to date." Science is not ever definitive. It is never absolute. That is not how it works. If you need definitive and absolute, then you need to stay within the realm of religion and gods.

                I realize the inability of science to make absolute conclusions is a constant avenue through which the theist can muddy the waters and raise doubts. But that is not going to greatly influence someone who understands science. I'm OK with, "this appears to be the way it works, until and if we find other evidence."
                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                Comment


                • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                  As best I can tell - the source. The music analogy is poorly constructed. The brain is not how mind is "expressed." We do that with our bodies. Our conscious choices are reflected in our activities. When they are not - there is no external manifestation of "mind," yet mind remains. We know that from our internal sense of mind. And we know that by a multitude of experiments that link the physical actions of "brain" to the experiences of "mind."



                  Science can "answer" that question to the same degree it can "answer" any question: it can provide evidence and a "best explanation to date." Science is not ever definitive. It is never absolute. That is not how it works. If you need definitive and absolute, then you need to stay within the realm of religion and gods.

                  I realize the inability of science to make absolute conclusions is a constant avenue through which the theist can muddy the waters and raise doubts. But that is not going to greatly influence someone who understands science. I'm OK with, "this appears to be the way it works, until and if we find other evidence."
                  You spent half your post arguing the analogy instead of addressing the point, and then simply repeated your fallacy in the other half. The question of whether or not the mind exists separate from the brain is a metaphysical question far outside the boundaries of science. I never asked for absolute certainty (so nice straw man), but this is not something that science can give you even a "close enough" answer.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    You spent half your post arguing the analogy instead of addressing the point,
                    Yes - I think a poor analogy should be outlined for what it is. Yours was very poor.

                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    and then simply repeated your fallacy in the other half. The question of whether or not the mind exists separate from the brain is a metaphysical question far outside the boundaries of science. I never asked for absolute certainty (so nice straw man), but this is not something that science can give you even a "close enough" answer.
                    No. Mind and brain lie both within the bounds of science to explore. Yes - you can have a metaphysical discussion about some of the related issues - but the relationship between mind and brain has been explored and researched and tested many, many, many times and in many ways over the years.

                    This is one of those philosophical issues that reminds me of that old saw that a philosopher will argue with you for an hour that the walls are not substantial, and then exit the room by way of the door. So...if you are as convinced as you seem to be that mind exists separately from brain, then I invite you to do a simple experiment and simply have someone dissect your brain. After all - it should have no impact on your mind, right? And you don't have to do the entire thing. Just have them muck around with the frontal cortex and remove most of it. That should leave your vital functions intact and you won't technically be dead or committing suicide. I know that is frowned upon by your faith.

                    Somehow, I think you probably won't take me up on that. But when you do - I will be convinced that you actually BELIEVE mind is separate from brain.
                    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                    Comment


                    • All your experiment would prove is that the brain can be damaged. It wouldn't prove that the mind originates in the brain.

                      And your suggestion that I effectively commit suicide in order to prove the sincerity of my beliefs is the sort of jackassery I've come to expect from Chuck or Jimmy. Needless to say, it doesn't improve my opinion of you.
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        All your experiment would prove is that the brain can be damaged. It wouldn't prove that the mind originates in the brain.
                        I don't believe I said it would prove anything, except that you actually believe the mind is of a different source than the brain.

                        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        And your suggestion that I effectively commit suicide in order to prove the sincerity of my beliefs is the sort of jackassery I've come to expect from Chuck or Jimmy.
                        Actually - I was specific about NOT committing suicide. It is a simple experiment. A sort of "put your money where your mouth is experiment." As I noted before - this entire discussion is of the "walls don't actually exist" but then "exit via the door" ilk.

                        I don't actually expect you to act on your beliefs, MM. It was a kind of thought experiment.
                        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post





                          For the last time:

                          THE DISCUSSION IS NOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU SHOULD BELIEVE IN THE HYPOSTATIC UNION, BUT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CONTRADICTORY IN THE CONTEXT OF A CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW.
                          The Hypostatic Union is not contradictory in the "context of the Christian worldview", because the Christian worldview is that its not. It's deemed a 'paradox' or 'mystery' in Christian theology and beyond mere human understanding. .
                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                            Good thing I never made that claim then.
                            …and yet full divinity is an attribute of the man Jesus.

                            There is no logical dilemma. You're simply using your own conceptions of what ‘fully god’ and ‘fully man’ means to force an imaginary contradiction.
                            It’s an obvious logical contradiction that one single entity cannot simultaneously be two ‘fully complete’ different entities. You're simply using your own conceptions of what ‘fully god’ and ‘fully man’ means to force an imaginary being’s existence.
                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                              …and yet full divinity is an attribute of the man Jesus.
                              Full divinity is an attribute of the God-man Jesus.

                              Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                              It’s an obvious logical contradiction that one single entity cannot simultaneously be two ‘fully complete’ different entities. You're simply using your own conceptions of what ‘fully god’ and ‘fully man’ means to force an imaginary being’s existence.
                              But the hypostatic union doesn't say that one single entity is simultaneously two `fully complete´ different entities. It's saying that one entity simultaneously has two different natures.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                Then it would be on you to show that it is not. The evidence available to me shows mind inextricably linked to brain. Alter the brain - and you alter the mind. Destroy the brain and you destroy the mind (and the life with it). We see this repeated over and over and over again throughout nature. Mind without brain is the stuff of fancy and fantasy.
                                There's not a single example anywhere on earth during it's entire history of the bolded having been demonstrated.
                                Last edited by JonathanL; 01-23-2019, 04:05 AM.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                158 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                426 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X