On The Reliability of The Old Testament

[Meriweather]

I still haven’t seen anything that defines this soul / spirit thing that is anything more than human emotion to which various religions have added their gods.

I define human emotion as more of a brain/mind function than that of spirit/soul.

 

[Hollie]

I think you’re unwilling to admit that Galileo, along with others in the period, were presenting ideas utterly contrary to Church doctrine. The Church mounted a ruthless attack on Galileo and others because rhere was a developing sense that laws of science must be based on actual observation of the facts rather than on Church traditions:

And I don't think you have studied both sides of the entire issue. At the time, Galileo said outright his findings were a theory and presented the realities of why his theory made sense. The Church had no problem with this. The argument started over whether Galileo should be allowed to change the Bible. Galileo was adamant because it was practically the only book available at the time. The Church was adamant that the Bible wasn't going to be changed on Galileo's say so. At that time, the Church had more power and Galileo ended up under house arrest. And his theory did not make its way into the Bible. It did, however, make its way into works of science. The Church had no objection

it seems to me that atheists and religionists alike make decisions less on their soul / spirit impulses (at least I hope so), than they do on more tangible levels such as risk vs. reward, probable outcome, past experience, expected outcome, etc.

What part of you makes the decision?

The pre-frontal cortex.

When you make decisions involving such things as analysis of risk vs. reward, probable outcome, past experience, expected outcome, etc., can you tell us anything about how the soul \ spirit gets involved?

It's strange because damage or injury to the brain, (ingesting drugs and medication), can affect decision-making abilities. It seems your soul / spirits and the pre-frontal cortex are affected equally by external factors and chemical manipulation. There's no indication of an soul / spirit acting independently of human physiology.

 

[Hollie]

I still haven’t seen anything that defines this soul / spirit thing that is anything more than human emotion to which various religions have added their gods.

I define human emotion as more of a brain/mind function than that of spirit/soul.

Me too, with the caveat that I don't see any evidence for interaction with souls / spirits.

 

[Meriweather]

The pre-frontal cortex.

When you make decisions involving such things as analysis of risk vs. reward, probable outcome, past experience, expected outcome, etc., can you tell us anything about how the soul \ spirit gets involved?

It's strange because damage or injury to the brain, (ingesting drugs and medication), can affect decision-making abilities. It seems your soul / spirits and the pre-frontal cortex are affected equally by external factors and chemical manipulation. There's no indication of an soul / spirit acting independently of human physiology.

The spirit/soul works with the body. For example, a broken leg affects one's ability to walk, run, crawl. Since the spirit and brain work together, what affects one will have an effect on the other.

 

[Meriweather]

Me too, with the caveat that I don't see any evidence for interaction with souls / spirits.

Remember, evidence requires physical material, so there is no evidence to be found (as far as I know).

However, a brain organism that simply goes around arguing with itself before it comes to a decision? If the brain was only this, it seems every brain would ultimately reach the same decision...and that is not what happens.

 

[Hollie]

The pre-frontal cortex.

When you make decisions involving such things as analysis of risk vs. reward, probable outcome, past experience, expected outcome, etc., can you tell us anything about how the soul \ spirit gets involved?

It's strange because damage or injury to the brain, (ingesting drugs and medication), can affect decision-making abilities. It seems your soul / spirits and the pre-frontal cortex are affected equally by external factors and chemical manipulation. There's no indication of an soul / spirit acting independently of human physiology.

The spirit/soul works with the body. For example, a broken leg affects one's ability to walk, run, crawl. Since the spirit and brain work together, what affects one will have an effect on the other.

Without some definition and demonstration of the soul / spirit, simple "....because I say so'' claims are weak.

 

[Hollie]

Me too, with the caveat that I don't see any evidence for interaction with souls / spirits.

Remember, evidence requires physical material, so there is no evidence to be found (as far as I know).

However, a brain organism that simply goes around arguing with itself before it comes to a decision? If the brain was only this, it seems every brain would ultimately reach the same decision...and that is not what happens.

As it applies to souls / spirits, I agree that there is a complete lack of evidence.

Remember, those making a positive assertion of something are tasked with supplying evidence. As you are making the positive assertion for souks / spirits, it falls to you to supply that "physical material".

 

[Meriweather]

Without some definition and demonstration of the soul / spirit, simple "....because I say so'' claims are weak.

No one is saying, "Because I say so." All you are hearing is how people come to the conclusion that there is more to human beings than body and brain.

 

[Meriweather]

Remember, those making a positive assertion of something at tasked with supplying evidence. As you are making the positive assertion for souks / spirits, it falls to you to supply physical material.

No one is making a scientific claim. Science involves the physical. Once we move into the metaphysical we cannot cling to anything physical, we are entering into that which is abstract, that which does not have a physical, concrete existence. Some believe there is nothing beyond the concrete. Others believe there is, which means we are in a sphere where we must work without a net. It's kind of fun, and often illuminating. But it requires letting go of things.

 

[Hollie]

Without some definition and demonstration of the soul / spirit, simple "....because I say so'' claims are weak.

No one is saying, "Because I say so." All you are hearing is how people come to the conclusion that there is more to human beings than body and brain.

I'm hearing claims based on a religious perspective that non-material, undemonstrated, undocumented and apparently unverifiable claims are true. There are those who conclude that Bigfoot is real, that the earth is 6,000 years old, that men lived to be 900 years old and any number of other bombastic ideas.

We live in a reality of some kind. We have this thing called a 'standard of proof' that requires fact can be separated from fiction with presentation of evidence.

 

[Meriweather]

I'm hearing claims based on a religious perspective that non-material, undemonstrated, undocumented and apparently unverifiable claims are true. There are those who conclude that Bigfoot is real, that the earth is 6,000 years old, that men lived to be 900 years old and any number of other bombastic ideas.

We live in a reality of some kind. We have this thing called a 'standard of proof' that requires fact can be separated from fiction with presentation of evidence.

Yeah, I hear the earth is flat, we never landed on the moon, Yeti, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness Monster etc. are real. It has never bothered me that some people believe this. People make these conclusions and remember what is said about conclusions: It is the point we stop thinking and settle. Nothing wrong with that, they are satisfied. Others choose to push on to what is beyond a flat earth, etc. and explore.

Hollie, I love science, and the discipline of measuring, of dealing with substance. Here is where you are willing to settle, and there is nothing wrong with that. I prefer to push on and study what is beyond evidence. I'm still exploring, unwilling to set my feet in the concrete (so-to-speak).

 

[Hollie]

Remember, those making a positive assertion of something at tasked with supplying evidence. As you are making the positive assertion for souks / spirits, it falls to you to supply physical material.

No one is making a scientific claim. Science involves the physical. Once we move into the metaphysical we cannot cling to anything physical, we are entering into that which is abstract, that which does not have a physical, concrete existence. Some believe there is nothing beyond the concrete. Others believe there is, which means we are in a sphere where we must work without a net. It's kind of fun, and often illuminating. But it requires letting go of things.

Letting go of things is fine when you don’t acknowledge responsibility for your actions. Proponents of claims to metaphysical, supernatural don’t hold some special exemption from supporting their claims. Theyvare not excused from showping why their source material (Bible), establishes their claims as true because some attach “holy” to their argument. What's missing from the formula that suggests metaphysics can insist the claims are valid without support?

The standards of proof of course.

 

[Meriweather]

Letting go of things is fine when you don’t acknowledge responsibility for your actions. Proponents of claims to metaphysical, supernatural don’t hold some special exemption from supporting their claims. Theyvare not excused from showping why their source material (Bible), establishes their claims as true because some attach “holy” to their argument. What's missing from the formula that suggests metaphysics can insist the claims are valid without support?

The standards of proof of course.

No. We are in sphere beyond proof, at least the kind of proof that can be used in the physical world. Here is what I don't get, Hollie. It doesn't bother me that there are those who believe in a flat earth, no moon landing, Yeti, a planet wide flood, etc. Nor does it bother me that many believe in reincarnation, that they will pass on to become Gods of other planets, etc.

My interests are my own and they make up my life--not the life of anyone else. Along the way I've picked up bits that pique my interest in the way a flat earth piques the interest of others.

Hollie, so what if millions, even billions of people are interested in religion and you are not? It is our interest, not yours, and it should mean as little to you as a flat earth committee means to me.

 

[Hollie]

Letting go of things is fine when you don’t acknowledge responsibility for your actions. Proponents of claims to metaphysical, supernatural don’t hold some special exemption from supporting their claims. Theyvare not excused from showping why their source material (Bible), establishes their claims as true because some attach “holy” to their argument. What's missing from the formula that suggests metaphysics can insist the claims are valid without support?

The standards of proof of course.

No. We are in sphere beyond proof, at least the kind of proof that can be used in the physical world. Here is what I don't get, Hollie. It doesn't bother me that there are those who believe in a flat earth, no moon landing, Yeti, a planet wide flood, etc. Nor does it bother me that many believe in reincarnation, that they will pass on to become Gods of other planets, etc.

My interests are my own and they make up my life--not the life of anyone else. Along the way I've picked up bits that pique my interest in the way a flat earth piques the interest of others.

Hollie, so what if millions, even billions of people are interested in religion and you are not? It is our interest, not yours, and it should mean as little to you as a flat earth committee means to me.

It must be nice to be in a sphere beyond proof. There's no requirement for reason and rationality or consistency. I find that nihilistic. When it involves coming to conclusions about all religious ideologies, I do make judgments. I make assessments about the internal components of the ideology which has an external result that affects many. I do judge, it's necessary and required to do so in order to discern how to proceed with both things and people.

 

[Meriweather]

It must be nice to be in a sphere beyond proof. There's no requirement for reason and rationality or consistency. I find that nihilistic. When it involves coming to conclusions about all religious ideologies, I do make judgments. I make assessments about the internal components of the ideology which has an external result that affects many. I do judge, it's necessary and required to do so in order to discern how to proceed with both things and people.

Ahh, reason, rationality, consistency! I'm betting you follow every recipe exactly, have a precise exercise regiment, and color inside the lines. Very admirable, in fact. I expect you are a proponent of leash laws and other restrictions. I'm guessing a very orderly life, correct?

My point is that there are more people who do not follow the faith I follow than those who do. They are explorers of another part of life in this universe. Judge them? No. Learn from them because they know and perceive things I do not. Having a grasp on reality is a good thing--until the point it entraps.

 

[Hollie]

It must be nice to be in a sphere beyond proof. There's no requirement for reason and rationality or consistency. I find that nihilistic. When it involves coming to conclusions about all religious ideologies, I do make judgments. I make assessments about the internal components of the ideology which has an external result that affects many. I do judge, it's necessary and required to do so in order to discern how to proceed with both things and people.

Ahh, reason, rationality, consistency! I'm betting you follow every recipe exactly, have a precise exercise regiment, and color inside the lines. Very admirable, in fact. I expect you are a proponent of leash laws and other restrictions. I'm guessing a very orderly life, correct?

My point is that there are more people who do not follow the faith I follow than those who do. They are explorers of another part of life in this universe. Judge them? No. Learn from them because they know and perceive things I do not. Having a grasp on reality is a good thing--until the point it entraps.

Oh, my. Being entrapped by reality. Reason, rationality, a reality based worldview - I feel cheated.

All seriousness aside, I think supernaturalists break from “reasoning” with the more “feelings” based tenets of religion and superstition. Feelings are the least reliable way to make a solid decision. One can function using critical faculties on an ongoing basis, and while you can misinterpret some sensory input, rationality adheres to parameters that are testable.

 

[Meriweather]

I think supernaturalists break from “reasoning” with the more “feelings”

No doubt, some do.

 

[Meriweather]

Feelings are the least reliable way to make a solid decision.

Feelings are an alert that a decision of some kind needs to be made. The symbol of the lion lying down with the lamb is a powerful one. What decision will satisfy both? Who makes the decision to satisfy both?

 

[MarcATL]

I never understood those who reject the notion of God but readily accept the notion of alien life. Why accept one but not the other? I suppose it all hinges on the accepted notion that life can just spontaneously evolve but the thought of an eternal God seems absurd to many. But as we gaze across a seemingly lifeless universe and are unable to manufacture but one living cell on our own, the thought of life spontaneously coming to fruiting seems absurd to me.


Anyway, IF there is a God he would be fully capable of controlling us as he saw fit. The question becomes, why are we all not controlled by him 100%? We are allowed freedom, that is as much as man does not take from us which often means we later become slaves in some form or fashion, but it is God who gives us free and man who takes it from us. In fact, in human history the vast majority of men have been slaves to other men.

But the Bible is a story of liberation, beginning with Moses leading his people out of slavery in Egypt. Then it was Christ coming to give people hope and liberation under a despotic Roman occupation, etc. promising a hopeful future at some point.

So again, why do we have free will and why do we crave it so? The answer can be seen in the teaching that God is love. Love demands choice. Love is impossible between two parties so long as one or the other cannot freely love the other back by their own free will. So God allows his creation to reject him as well as accept him.

Put another way, imagine you are God. You can create and control anything and everything. In effect, it would be like playing tic tac toe with yourself all day. However, give a creation free will and it all instantly has appeal and interest and meaning, no matter how insignificant they may appear in relation to a massive and eternal universe.

Amen!

 

[surada]

So where's the proof for the 40 day flood?

Maybe it was a four day flood of the Euphrates river basin. And, the ark was barges hauling beer, grain and livestock downriver.