God can be merciful to some, I suppose, and allow them to put God to a test. The devil tempted Jesus to do this but He would not do it. Most of us need to be less forgetful of what God has already done.
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
God can be merciful to some, I suppose, and allow them to put God to a test. The devil tempted Jesus to do this but He would not do it. Most of us need to be less forgetful of what God has already done.
Agreed. you cannot count the number of Christians by the number of professors. The visible church of professing believers is larger than the invisible church of genuine believers.
The parable of the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25) is a warning about false professors with false hopes.
Christianity wasn't a human invention along the way but extends back to Jesus Christ in the first century C.E. and to foundations going back to Creation.
Generations of devoted disciples of Jesus Christ have continued for many centuries. There are monasteries in Europe and even in the Middle East in both Western and Eastern Orthodox traditions where prayer and worship have been happening for 1500 years or more.
Generations of devoted disciples of Jesus Christ have continued for many centuries. There are monasteries in Europe and even in the Middle East in both Western and Eastern Orthodox traditions where prayer and worship have been happening for 1500 years or more.
Are you a neuroscientist? Are you particularly knowledgeable, as a lay person, about the brain? What is your level of expertise in this area?
That is quite the leap. You don't understand how the brain works and so it must be supernatural? Wouldn't that be like Job saying, "I don't understand where hail and snow come from, so I am going to assume God has storehouses for both in heaven."? That is, in fact, what Job is made to say.
Dan, this is called the "God of the gaps" argument. You don't understand how something works so you automatically plug God in as the explanation. I don't find this at all convincing. I haven't looked into the science of this, but I am not going to assume something supernatural must be going on. That is surrendering to the unknown. I would keep looking for a scientific explanation if I were you.
As the atheist knows, the office paper clip required intelligent design and intelligent manufacturing technique.
As the atheist professes to believe, the inter-dependent systems of the human body are an accident. See depiction below of human neck, arteries and more.
Source: Gray's Anatomy by Henry Gray (1860)
Q. Does the atheist have a bias against an Intelligent Designer?
As the atheist professes to believe, the inter-dependent systems of the human body are an accident. See depiction below of human neck, arteries and more.
Source: Gray's Anatomy by Henry Gray (1860)
Q. Does the atheist have a bias against an Intelligent Designer?
sorry for the delay, I didn't see your answer 'till today...
no, I'm not a neuroscientist, and as I said, my knowledge on this is limited... so, let's look at things we can both easily access... you say you have the ability to choose... can you demonstrate this, provide evidence that you can do this? if your evidence is basically your sensation of choosing, how is that different than saying that one has a sensation of God?
Consider how choice might work... I think we both agree that our brains are made up of neurons. So, how do the neurons make choices? Is there something in neurons that is not deterministic or random? It's a fairly easy question, I think... the physicists say stuff is random or deterministic, take your pick as to how much of each... neither thing would produce what we think of as choice, I think...
or, perhaps we could talk about this approach, Cycel...
You assert that you can make a choice. Suppose, for the sake of a case, that I assert that you can not. As modern, rational people, we'll use science to see if we can resolve the dispute. Science is based on observation and experimentation, with reason applied (loose definition). Can we think of a way that I can observe you making a choice? Or, an experiment that we can do that will resolve this?
Happens with me all the time.
Yours and mine both.Dan_473 said:
Just a moment, I am choosing to go to the kitchen for a Coke.... Okay, I'm back.Dan_473 said:
Perhaps it is true that I made a subconscious decision to grab a Coke a moment before I was aware I was going to do that. This is what the research seems to demonstrate. That doesn't really alter the reality that it was my brain that made the decision. I suppose it is also possible for your brain to provide the sensation of another being. This is also what the research shows. See the following video:
Michael Shermer Out of Body Experiment - YouTube
Other studies have suggested that the test subject's level of suggestibility plays a big part. It may be that some people are simply more prone to being tricked by their brain into thinking they have sensed the paranormal.
I am convinced it is all taking place in the brain.Dan_473 said:
I just don't see that there is an issue here at all. My brain makes a decision and I act upon it.
The paper clip is not comparable to a biological system. We reproduce without any apparent help from God. When you examine a complex biological system you are looking at the end product of more than half a billion years of evolution. Of course it is complex, but complexity is not an argument against evolution. Read Francis Collins book, The Language of God. Perhaps you will then understand what I am talking about.
Thank you to all those obviously intelligent engineers and others who team up to design, manufacture and distribute office paper clips. It's a great product with great design and consistent manufactured quality.
But, yes, biological organisms are even more intelligently and intricately engineered and impossible for any human being to create. A trillion and more years are insufficient to randomly and accidentally do the impossible (i.e. impossible without God). Creating life from non-life has been and continues to be impossible for anyone but God. Random processes do not explain it. Even single-celled organisms like amoeba and border-line organisms like viruses contain more complexity that humans can engineer and build and even understand.
US President Bill Clinton as quoted in "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief" by Francis S. Collins at a celebration of the completion of the first mapping of the human genome: "Today, we are learning the language in which God created life. We are gaining ever more awe for the complexity, the beauty, and the wonder of God's most divine and sacred gift."
IMHO, Jesus Christ would be God's most divine and sacred gift but I like the quote.
Yes, I did finish reading "The Language of God" earlier this year. Thank you for influencing me to read the book.
. I am glad that I read it and could re-read parts if needed. Yes, monkey chromosomes do carry a resemblance to human chromosomes but differences are there and we really know only a little about what the code means in the genes.
I suppose this is true in any system of belief. There will always be those who feel obliged to put on a public face. This is especially true in Islam, but even in Christianity among some communities there is considerable pressure placed on individuals to conform. As far as determining who the genuine believers are, I think that is all in the eye of the beholder. The Jehovah's Witnesses are convinced it is them alone while independent churches in the American south think it is themselves. All rely on scripture to make that determination and all come to different conclusions. Someone looking at this from the outside simply says you are all Christians. In my view, if you think you are a Christian then you probably are.
How do you take that meaning? It simply means stay prepared. It is another version of “Christ will arrive like a thief in the night.”
The parable of the Ten Virgins describes ten with a measure of a moral and pure background who are all waiting for the bridgegroom to come (church members waiting for Christ to come). Five are ready and prepared. Five are actually not ready and not prepared. These last five are shut out and not able to enter the wedding with the bridegroom (These last five are shut out from heaven and from being in the presence of Christ).
I heard someone at church respond: "That is scary."
The difference between one group of five and the other group of five was whether they had oil (the Holy Spirit) or not.
ok, hopefully we're making progress on understanding each other...
does your brain operate deterministically? that is, if we knew the state of your brain at a point in the past, and all of the input(s) that had entered it since then, could we accurately predict your decision to get up and get the coke?
You are a athiest because you chose to be, not believe in God, can't blame that on people. You chose yourself.
I hope you come to know him personally, he is beyond words.
Cycel (or anyone),
Since we want to deal with simple physics (post 3252 and others previous to it), let's take a look at a coin toss. It appears random, but of course the outcome is determined by the force of the toss, how long it's in the air, and so on.
So it is with everything we can see in the universe, it's all determined by previous states.
Given this deterministic situation, your brain may appear to be making choices, it may feel like it is, but, like the coin toss above, it's all determined. So, no choice is possible.
That is, no choice is possible if one deals just with the physical world.
Since we want to deal with simple physics (post 3252 and others previous to it), let's take a look at a coin toss. It appears random, but of course the outcome is determined by the force of the toss, how long it's in the air, and so on.
So it is with everything we can see in the universe, it's all determined by previous states.
Given this deterministic situation, your brain may appear to be making choices, it may feel like it is, but, like the coin toss above, it's all determined. So, no choice is possible.
That is, no choice is possible if one deals just with the physical world.
Paperclips were intelligently designed by human beings on an assembly line. Therefore, the universe was made by human beings on an assembly line.
This is why the paperclip argument fails. Just because paperclips were created by someone doesn't prove another object was created by someone.
Did man create water, stalactites, or trees? No, these are all natural occurrence that all happened without an intelligent human being - therefore there is no intelligent designer for the universe! (this is also a flawed argument, but it's the exact same argument used by nl except it focuses on a non-man made object).
Can we please stop using the watch maker argument, the flaws are so apparent that I find it hard to understand how anyone can view it as "proof" of a creator.
If you find humans to be too complex to have naturally formed, fair enough. But looking at a "complex" object doesn't prove your point true or false, it's an unrelated object.
This is why the paperclip argument fails. Just because paperclips were created by someone doesn't prove another object was created by someone.
Did man create water, stalactites, or trees? No, these are all natural occurrence that all happened without an intelligent human being - therefore there is no intelligent designer for the universe! (this is also a flawed argument, but it's the exact same argument used by nl except it focuses on a non-man made object).
Can we please stop using the watch maker argument, the flaws are so apparent that I find it hard to understand how anyone can view it as "proof" of a creator.
If you find humans to be too complex to have naturally formed, fair enough. But looking at a "complex" object doesn't prove your point true or false, it's an unrelated object.