The Weakness Of Science -- Trying To Explain The Life Spirit

[C_Clayton_Jones]

People spend a lot of their lives doing things, but there is a question that is in the back of their minds such as why did God create us? Or why are we here?

The answer to why God created us is for his pleasure. "Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created." Revelation 4:11

Even though we are here for "his pleasure," it does not mean that we are entertainers or we are beings to play with for his amusement. What it means is God is a creative being and creating us is part of being creative. If we create things, then it gives us pleasure and a feeling of accomplishment. God is also a personal being, so it gives him pleasure to have a relationship with his creation as we have pleasure in having a relationship with our relatives and friends.

The Bible says that we were made in the image and likeness of God so that we have the ability to know, love, worship, serve and have fellowship with him. What does this mean? God is spirit, so we, too, are spirit. However, we are a spirit that has a body. God created the human body out of dust and blew the breath of life into it. This spirit is us and it is that which is in the image and likeness of God. Our bodies are physical and because of sin may not be perfect. It doesn't matter as it is only temporary as we all know that it will return to being dust once more. Yet, the spirit will live on. Will it be spiritually perfect or will it be spiritually dead and perish in the fire?

Science is a search for the truth, but today's science ignores the spirit or that which it cannot understand. It tries to explain away the spirit or life force as something that exists because the physical body exists. It's only living because the body is made up of cells that are living. Everything can be explained with the physical body and brain. This is the weakness and folly of science today. It does not recognize the spirit and only acknowledges the body and material world. They cannot explain God and why he created us nor adequately explain why we are here?

This fails as an appeal to authority fallacy.

 

[Frannie]

The answer to why God created us is for his plescienceasure.

Oh, well then, who needs science, when we have mystical shamans like you to reveal truth to us!

God and science go together the more time goes by and more we learn the closer they get. Someday we will understand both and we will be better people for it.

God came from the heavens, that we are now beginning to explore. Find a mirror to find God, you were made in his image

If you think about it image is not your body but the energy from your body.

No your image actually exist in DNA before your body exist

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical.

Which means nobody can describe it. Or, alternatively, anyone can, any way they like. A sure sign that something is utter nonsense.

To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one

But, oops, that's true for everyone,not just scientists. Like you said...not physical. You can't use any means to discern the difference, either. Kind of cut off your nose to spite your face on this one...

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical.

Which means nobody can describe it. Or, alternatively, anyone can, any way they like. A sure sign that something is utter nonsense.

To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one

But, oops, that's true for everyone,not just scientists. Like you said...not physical. You can't use any means to discern the difference, either. Kind of cut off your nose to spite your face on this one...

Tell us where life came from, if you can't then it must not be real, according to your thinking

This fails as an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

 

[Frannie]

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical.

Which means nobody can describe it. Or, alternatively, anyone can, any way they like. A sure sign that something is utter nonsense.

To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one

But, oops, that's true for everyone,not just scientists. Like you said...not physical. You can't use any means to discern the difference, either. Kind of cut off your nose to spite your face on this one...

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical.

Which means nobody can describe it. Or, alternatively, anyone can, any way they like. A sure sign that something is utter nonsense.

To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one

But, oops, that's true for everyone,not just scientists. Like you said...not physical. You can't use any means to discern the difference, either. Kind of cut off your nose to spite your face on this one...

Tell us where life came from, if you can't then it must not be real, according to your thinking

This fails as an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

There is no such thing as an ignorant question. Was Newton ignorant for questioning why the apple fell?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

People spend a lot of their lives doing things, but there is a question that is in the back of their minds such as why did God create us? Or why are we here?

The answer to why God created us is for his pleasure. "Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created." Revelation 4:11

Even though we are here for "his pleasure," it does not mean that we are entertainers or we are beings to play with for his amusement. What it means is God is a creative being and creating us is part of being creative. If we create things, then it gives us pleasure and a feeling of accomplishment. God is also a personal being, so it gives him pleasure to have a relationship with his creation as we have pleasure in having a relationship with our relatives and friends.

The Bible says that we were made in the image and likeness of God so that we have the ability to know, love, worship, serve and have fellowship with him. What does this mean? God is spirit, so we, too, are spirit. However, we are a spirit that has a body. God created the human body out of dust and blew the breath of life into it. This spirit is us and it is that which is in the image and likeness of God. Our bodies are physical and because of sin may not be perfect. It doesn't matter as it is only temporary as we all know that it will return to being dust once more. Yet, the spirit will live on. Will it be spiritually perfect or will it be spiritually dead and perish in the fire?

Science is a search for the truth, but today's science ignores the spirit or that which it cannot understand. It tries to explain away the spirit or life force as something that exists because the physical body exists. It's only living because the body is made up of cells that are living. Everything can be explained with the physical body and brain. This is the weakness and folly of science today. It does not recognize the spirit and only acknowledges the body and material world. They cannot explain God and why he created us nor adequately explain why we are here?

Science is a Method. I wouldn't ask a plumber to explain God.

Karl Popper on God.pdf

Greg

Then explain where the plumber came from

And another appeal to ignorance fallacy.

That science might not have determined the source of life doesn’t mean the ‘answer’ is ‘god.’

 

[Confounding]

Nope, nothing exist outside of physics. The arrogance of science is demanding from our perspective on the earth that everything must either be known or even be knowable from our vantage point. God is merely a force of creation beyond our own

Outside of physics that we'll ever understand at least. Anyway, semantics aside I think a belief that God exists is no more or less reasonable than a belief that God does not exist.

 

[Confounding]

doesn’t mean the ‘answer’ is ‘god.’

Doesn't mean it isn't either.

 

[Frannie]

People spend a lot of their lives doing things, but there is a question that is in the back of their minds such as why did God create us? Or why are we here?

The answer to why God created us is for his pleasure. "Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created." Revelation 4:11

Even though we are here for "his pleasure," it does not mean that we are entertainers or we are beings to play with for his amusement. What it means is God is a creative being and creating us is part of being creative. If we create things, then it gives us pleasure and a feeling of accomplishment. God is also a personal being, so it gives him pleasure to have a relationship with his creation as we have pleasure in having a relationship with our relatives and friends.

The Bible says that we were made in the image and likeness of God so that we have the ability to know, love, worship, serve and have fellowship with him. What does this mean? God is spirit, so we, too, are spirit. However, we are a spirit that has a body. God created the human body out of dust and blew the breath of life into it. This spirit is us and it is that which is in the image and likeness of God. Our bodies are physical and because of sin may not be perfect. It doesn't matter as it is only temporary as we all know that it will return to being dust once more. Yet, the spirit will live on. Will it be spiritually perfect or will it be spiritually dead and perish in the fire?

Science is a search for the truth, but today's science ignores the spirit or that which it cannot understand. It tries to explain away the spirit or life force as something that exists because the physical body exists. It's only living because the body is made up of cells that are living. Everything can be explained with the physical body and brain. This is the weakness and folly of science today. It does not recognize the spirit and only acknowledges the body and material world. They cannot explain God and why he created us nor adequately explain why we are here?

Science is a Method. I wouldn't ask a plumber to explain God.

Karl Popper on God.pdf

Greg

Then explain where the plumber came from

And another appeal to ignorance fallacy.

That science might not have determined the source of life doesn’t mean the ‘answer’ is ‘god.’

Your mind is closed, when if ever it opens get back to us.

 

[Frannie]

Nope, nothing exist outside of physics. The arrogance of science is demanding from our perspective on the earth that everything must either be known or even be knowable from our vantage point. God is merely a force of creation beyond our own

Outside of physics that we'll ever understand at least. Anyway, semantics aside I think a belief that God exists is no more or less reasonable than a belief that God does not exist.

In order for you to say that God exist as something unexplainable (supernatural), you must first define God, which you can not do. While 99.999999999999999999999999999 percent of all knowledge is unknown due to our minuscule view from the Earth this does not mean that any of this is supernatural. It may well be impossible to travel outside of the Milky Way, or travel to other Galaxies might be as common as a 2 day trip across the USA by car is now, or a 4 hour jet ride. If you have the answer, be sure that you are wrong

 

[Hale]

Those who say Science is everything and religion is wrong are actually very religious. They are Materialists, and they worship at the altar of Matter. They can't create life, they can't explain it's origin, so they obfuscate with stories of "big bangs" and "a million monkeys with a million typewriters".

We're not supposed to notice that the big bang had to come from somewhere/someone, or that by their own science of probabilities the "million monkeys" theory is statistically impossible.

We're also not supposed to notice that science hasn't always been this way. Until about 30-40 years ago, virtually all scientists acknowledged at least the likelihood of a Creator, and most practiced religion in some form. Spirituality was a given, and was considered an integral part of an educated man.

They say that those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it, but in this case they not only haven't learned, they're actively trying to repeal history. It's not going to end well, but we know that.

 

[Frannie]

Those who say Science is everything and religion is wrong are actually very religious. They are Materialists, and they worship at the altar of Matter. They can't create life, they can't explain it's origin, so they obfuscate with stories of "big bangs" and "a million monkeys with a million typewriters".

We're not supposed to notice that the big bang had to come from somewhere/someone, or that by their own science of probabilities the "million monkeys" theory is statistically impossible.

We're also not supposed to notice that science hasn't always been this way. Until about 30-40 years ago, virtually all scientists acknowledged at least the likelihood of a Creator, and most practiced religion in some form. Spirituality was a given, and was considered an integral part of an educated man.

They say that those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it, but in this case they not only haven't learned, they're actively trying to repeal history. It's not going to end well, but we know that.

I believe that the term most often applied to these so called scientific clowns that believe they are pond scum is Darwinist, with Darwin being their God or prophet as it may be.

 

[DOTR]

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical. To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one.

They know there is a problem. They know there is a difference in kind rather than degree between humans an animals. They know computers can’t think because consciousness is miraculous rather than reductionist. (See Roger Penrise The Emperors New Mind”
It’s a shallow person can’t say “I don’t know”.

 

[Frannie]

Science can't explain Spirit, because Spirit is not physical. To a scientist, there is no discernible difference between a dead body and a live one.

They know there is a problem. They know there is a difference in kind rather than degree between humans an animals. They know computers can’t think because consciousness is miraculous rather than reductionist. (See Roger Penrise The Emperors New Mind”
It’s a shallow person can’t say “I don’t know”.

There is no difference between humans and animals, unless you believe that the human is not an animal, which it clearly is.

Humans are smarter, cheetahs are faster, whales can hold their breath for a long time.

Next

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

there is no evidence that all life came from nothing.

Nobody said it "came from nothing". Once again, you articulate your thoughts poorly.

What IS a foregone conclusion is that it arose from nature via physical processes that require no magic or divine intervention. The evidence for this comes in the form of every observation we have ever made and every bit of evidence we have ever collected. These all show us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws.

We know the Sun is 5 billion years old. We know the universe is 13.8 billion years old. So, at the point where there is our sun, there was once no star at all. As all the evidence we have ever collected shows us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws, we look for and hopefully come to understand a natural explanation for star formation.

Now, apply the same process to abiogenesis. Do you propose magical events to explain star formation? No? Then why would you do the same for the formation of life? Religion, of course. This demonstrates a silly double standard that arises purely from superstition and fetishism.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

God and science go together

Only because God and religion have zero effect on science, and vice versa. So, they "go together" in the sense that two inert gases can "go together" in a flask without any perceived reaction, but sodium and water can't.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your mind is closed, when if ever it opens get back to us.

On the contrary, evidence based thinkers are far more open minded than any religious believer like yourself. You already think you have the answers and no new information brought to light since the iron age changes them. Evidence based thinkers, however, have to change their stance whenever new, compelling evidence comes to light.

 

[Frannie]

there is no evidence that all life came from nothing.

Nobody said it "came from nothing". Once again, you articulate your thoughts poorly.

What IS a foregone conclusion is that it arose from nature via physical processes that require no magic or divine intervention. The evidence for this comes in the form of every observation we have ever made and every bit of evidence we have ever collected. These all show us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws.

We know the Sun is 5 billion years old. We know the universe is 13.8 billion years old. So, at the point where there is our sun, there was once no star at all. As all the evidence we have ever collected shows us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws, we look for and hopefully come to understand a natural explanation for star formation.

Now, apply the same process to abiogenesis. Do you propose magical events to explain star formation? No? Then why would you do the same for the formation of life? Religion, of course. This demonstrates a silly double standard that arises purely from superstition and fetishism.

The problem with that babble is that you are only looking backwards on the arrow of time. Time so far as is known does not travel backwards, only forwards. Once you look to a lifeless planet Mars visited, colonized and seeded with life, you will have achieved a view of God. Just get your ass out of the past and create a new better future

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We're not supposed to notice that the big bang had to come from somewhere/someone,

No, they just don't provide to know what that "something "is, unlike you. So they are honest, and you are not.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

there is no evidence that all life came from nothing.

Nobody said it "came from nothing". Once again, you articulate your thoughts poorly.

What IS a foregone conclusion is that it arose from nature via physical processes that require no magic or divine intervention. The evidence for this comes in the form of every observation we have ever made and every bit of evidence we have ever collected. These all show us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws.

We know the Sun is 5 billion years old. We know the universe is 13.8 billion years old. So, at the point where there is our sun, there was once no star at all. As all the evidence we have ever collected shows us a deterministic universe that follows natural laws, we look for and hopefully come to understand a natural explanation for star formation.

Now, apply the same process to abiogenesis. Do you propose magical events to explain star formation? No? Then why would you do the same for the formation of life? Religion, of course. This demonstrates a silly double standard that arises purely from superstition and fetishism.

The problem with that babble is that you are only looking backwards on the arrow of time. Time so far as is known does not travel backwards, only forwards. Once you look to a lifeless planet Mars visited, colonized and seeded with life, you will have achieved a view of God. Just get your ass out of the past and create a new better future

What a bunch of inane pap. Yes time only travels forward...that is how we have determinism.

 

[Frannie]

Your mind is closed, when if ever it opens get back to us.

On the contrary, evidence based thinkers are far more open minded than any religious believer like yourself. You already think you have the answers and no new information brought to light since the iron age changes them. Evidence based thinkers, however, have to change their stance whenever new, compelling evidence comes to light.

I have never yet applied religion to any of my thoughts, just logic. The human animal is so far as we know the most intelligent force in the Universe, thus it is the most Godlike, and clearly has or will have the ability to find and settle new Worlds at some point. To view this you must see the future that you will build, not babble about an unchangeable past