Constructive gadfly
Published on September 14, 2011 By stevendedalus In Philosophy

I don’t have a problem with atheists — each to his own comfort level — nonetheless, it is ridiculous for one of that inclination to get rattled to the extent that others of belief are denied their comfort. Atheism by definition is free from religion. Theists are free to believe as they see fit; atheists should look upon these  " misguided" as pathetic but have the right to the "wrong" path. If, however, atheist take on the passion of "religion" in their belief that there is no God, they in reality are in the business of propagating their non-faith as feverishly as the old Marxist line. In this respect they are as trapped in "belief" as the rest of us pathetic  old fools. They should therefore lobby for a limited currency series that states "In "God we do not trust," or a postage stamp that shows a black hole with the inscription "Godless."  


Comments (Page 22)
29 PagesFirst 20 21 22 23 24  Last
on Jan 30, 2012

lulapilgrim
Love true science.
Lula ... could you please definethe the term "true science" for me?

Chemicals ... that just bespeaks of the 1960's, hahaha … all those mind altering drugs.

on Jan 30, 2012

Smoothseas
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2010/07/29/Scientists-find-chemical-memory-molecule/UPI-13211280451790/

Not so much of a problem for the Atheistic Naturalistic Scientists in Israel I guess.

It was a problem for those 2 who commented a year ago...

 Martyn comments: 

References to the research is needed for this article. I find the journalist did not take time to ask any questions on the findings. For instance GABA (Aminobutyric acid) is actually known as a inhibitor neurotransmitter not a excitatory, now knowing this, having more GABA in the synapse means it will activate its receptors more strongly but in the mean time what is it inhibiting. You also have to take into account the fact that the synapse is actually a gap between neurons and neurotransmitters are how they communicate. So with this how can GABA make the synapse more liable to make memories. Currently we have no understanding on how memories are created, stored and retrieved and this articles sheds no light on the matter

SivCorp
Ah, but are chemicals the reason, or the reaction?  That adds a wrinkle to the science...

It seems Martyn would agree. 

on Jan 30, 2012

lulapilgrim
And where have you once seen that I choose to reject science? I admit I reject pseudo science of Darwinism (macro-evolution), but true science is great by me. Love true science. 

BoobzTwo
Lula ... could you please definethe the term "true science" for me?

Sure.

True science is truth whether it manifests in theology, which deals with God and the laws of God, or experimental science which deals with nature and the laws of nature.

 

on Jan 30, 2012

lulapilgrim
Quoting SivCorp,
reply 313
Ah, but are chemicals the reason, or the reaction? That adds a wrinkle to the science...

It seems Martyn would agree.

Jumping to a conclusion rather quickly don't you think? I think Martyn (whoever that may be) is simply referring to a single amino acid and not the entire realm of chemical compounds that exist.

on Jan 30, 2012

SivCorp
Ah, but are chemicals the reason, or the reaction? That adds a wrinkle to the science...

Well those chemicals don't spontaneously appear from no where, your cells make them. And if you're arguing that these things don't have a material presence, then why would your "soul" or what have you produce physical results? It is because its all in your mind somewhere

lulapilgrim
When Catholics fail to live up to Christ's teachings on morals, it has everything to do with them and nothing to do with the CC.

But I don't care about the CC, my point was about the Catholics themselves. They have to decide to follow the CC or not, and in which way they do so. That is their independent decision. That means people ultimately decide what they think god is. Many may accept the Catholic version in some form or another, but they still had to make the decision.

lulapilgrim
And where have you once seen that I choose to reject science? I admit I reject pseudo science of Darwinism (macro-evolution), but true science is great by me. Love true science.

You're free to reject what you will. Just as your infallibility of a church run by men is utterly incomprehensible to me. But I accept that for whatever reason you have faith in it.

on Jan 30, 2012

BoobzTwo
Chemicals ... that just bespeaks of the 1960's, hahaha … all those mind altering drugs.

Certainly added spirituality to many who have visited the desert or the cow pasture.

on Jan 30, 2012

“One must state it plainly. Religion comes from the period of human prehistory where nobody-not even the mighty Democritus who concluded that all matter was made from atoms-had the smallest idea what was going on. It comes from the bawling and fearful infancy of our species, and is a babyish attempt to meet our inescapable demand for knowledge (as well as for comfort, reassurance and other infantile needs). Today the least educated of my children knows much more about the natural order than any of the founders of religion, and one would like to think-though the connection is not a fully demonstrable one-that this is why they seem so uninterested in sending fellow humans to hell.”
Christopher Hitchens, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

on Jan 30, 2012

lulapilgrim
Quoting GoaFan77,
reply 257
Even if you believe in god, you have to make up your own mind on what you think he thinks is good and evil. The Catholic church certainly doesn't agree on every single moral issue, millions of its followers clearly do not think it morally wrong to use birth control or even abortion.

GoaFan77
Quoting lulapilgrim, reply 314
When Catholics fail to live up to Christ's teachings on morals, it has everything to do with them and nothing to do with the CC.

GoaFan77
But I don't care about the CC,

Fine, but don't make incorrect statements about the CC. 

 

.............................

I believe Love, memory, good and evil are immaterial realities. 

GoaFan77
I and many people who spend their lives examining such things believe they are chemicals. We know they exist, we simply do not yet have technology precise enough to manipulate them.

GoaFan77
Well those chemicals don't spontaneously appear from no where, your cells make them. And if you're arguing that these things don't have a material presence, then why would your "soul" or what have you produce physical results? It is because its all in your mind somewhere

Yep, I'm arguing they don't have a material presence. Can surgeons operate and remove chemicals that are love, memory, good and evil? No, they can't. Nor can Surgeons operate and inject chemicals that are love, memory, good or evil. 

However, you are consistent in adhering to your strict naturalist worldview ...reducing immaterial realities to matter hasn't been demonstrated but assumed to be true! 

.............

on Jan 30, 2012

lulapilgrim
Fine, but don't make incorrect statements about the CC.

I believe you are the only one who thinks I made any statements about the Church. Just Catholics and my opinions.

lulapilgrim
However, you are consistent in adhering to your strict naturalist worldview ...reducing immaterial realities to matter hasn't been demonstrated but assumed to be true!

My world view is consistent, I think it has been sufficiently proven. It is not my fault that you choose to reject my evidence. I think that any open minded individual who takes a real look at the evidence would agree. But I am not here to convert you, so I don't care what you do with it. But likewise, don't make incorrect statements about my worldview.

lulapilgrim
Yep, I'm arguing they don't have a material presence. Can surgeons operate and remove chemicals that are love, memory, good and evil? No, they can't. Nor can Surgeons operate and inject chemicals that are love, memory, good or evil.

I've already answered this exact same talking point. We do not have the technology yet for manipulating something so small, complicated, and in a very sensitive area. You clearly overestimate surgeons if you use them as the basis for all of your "proof".

 

on Jan 30, 2012

BoobzTwo
I do not believe in the one god or any god perceivable through only mysticism, but that in no way prevents me from changing my mind given the right incentive … like a tiny bit of proof. 
 

BoobzTwo
You have been repeatedly told that an atheist does not believe in god because it is improvable and is not based on anything else.

BoobzTwo
Until you can prove the existence of god … all your arguments are mute because you and everything in your life is dependent on this one starting point … and you still cannot prove his existence … all you can do is talk about it … big difference.

There are many proofs of the existence of Almighty God but before I get to them, please tell us....

If there is no God, where this universe we live in came from...where did the lands, the oceans, the orderly planetary system come from? Did the vegetable, mineral, and animal creation and man, come from nobody, from nowhere? 

on Jan 31, 2012

lulapilgrim
If there is no God, where this universe we live in came from...where did the lands, the oceans, the orderly planetary system come from? Did the vegetable, mineral, and animal creation and man, come from nobody, from nowhere?

What makes you think there has to have been a state of nothingness? I believe just as time going forward is boundless that it is also boundless going back so everything material we know of in life and everything that exists which we will never know of has existed in one form or another going back in time and will exist in one form or another forever going forward in time. There is simply no state of nothingness for the entirety of the universe as we know it and beyond for which I can comprehend.

 

on Jan 31, 2012




Lula says that Love, memories, and the perceptions/opinions of good and evil are immaterial realities. 
 
GoaFan77 says that Love, memories, and the perceptions/opinions of good and evil do materially exist. They are in chemical form in your mind.

GoaFan77
It is not my fault that you choose to reject my evidence. I

What evidence was that?  Didn't you say that the evidence was "not yet"?

lulapilgrim
Quoting GoaFan77, reply 282
Not yet, but it has been proven that the brain creates chemicals to make you feel love, and likewise memories. Your feeling can clearly be somewhat manipulate with drugs. Its only another step to be able to create feelings and memories from scratch.

First you make the naturalist claim that love materially exists (is matter in chemical form) in the mind. Then you claim that the brain creates chemicals that is not love, but rather that makes us FEEL love.

Anyway,  as the Beatles song goes, I say yes and you say no, .....

I say the mind is distinct from the brain. I say that the mind is the soul thinking (our intellect), a gift from Almighty God. 

The soul is related to the body and the mind is related to the brain. The soul and the mind are immaterial realities and the body and the brain are material realities. 

 

 

 

on Jan 31, 2012

lulapilgrim
What evidence was that? Didn't you say that the evidence was "not yet"?

I said we do not have the technology to manipulate them. The evidence exists. We do not have the technology to manipulate plate tectonics but the evidence is clear it exists.

lulapilgrim
First you make the naturalist claim that love materially exists (is matter in chemical form) in the mind. Then you claim that the brain creates chemicals that is not love, but rather that makes us FEEL love.

To me there is no difference. Love is what we feel, that feeling is caused by chemicals in the brain. You can talk about your love for someone in an abstract sense, but what created that love in the first place is chemical. The abstract thoughts that you are thinking about love physically exist. Your memories of love are chemical.

 

on Jan 31, 2012

Smoothseas
What makes you think there has to have been a state of nothingness?

Where does this come from? I don't think that. I believe that nothing existed prior to God creating, except God. So there cannot be a state of nothingness because Almighty God is eternal, He always exists.  

Smoothseas
I believe just as time going forward is boundless that it is also boundless going back so everything material we know of in life and everything that exists which we will never know of has existed in one form or another going back in time and will exist in one form or another forever going forward in time.

God created time. At the commencement of Creation is when time began. As time and space are co-terminous with created existences, they too had a beginning. 

There was not time before Almighty God created things into existence. The universe had a first moment, before which it did not exist. And referring to that moment, we say that the world was created at the beginning of time.  

As far as time being boundless going forever forward, time as we know it will end when Christ comes again at the end of the world and we'll all enter eternity...eternal life in Heaven or Hell.

 

on Jan 31, 2012

GoaFan77
You can talk about your love for someone in an abstract sense, but what created that love in the first place is chemical.

Then I would say that science points to God for God created love. What's more God is love but that's taking love into the theological side of science. 

29 PagesFirst 20 21 22 23 24  Last