EdgedThesis

Remember in this topic we are already assuming that God exists. It's just a matter of who will rebel against him, and why. It's a matter of his justice, or lack thereof.

Oh I never meant to say humans are intrinsically evil. I believe the complete opposite of that, actually. What I meant to say is that if the Universe, in totality (that is, all instances and all locations and all things and all energies), was created in one divine instant, then God has essentially already crafted all humans in each and every moment of their lives. So if you follow the life of a murderer, you could say that his defining moment--the one where he sinks his blade into his victim's flesh--was sculpted and painted in full detail by a knowing god. This is something you can imagine if you see God as the extra-temporal being you describe. And to answer Fadooda's question for you, I think you said you were a Middle Eastern Christian using Aramaic texts?

Ah, but the argument is that the laws of cause and effect (as we know them from our three-dimensional perspective) ultimately bind our each and every decision. From the godly perspective you present, one in four dimensions, the argument grows clearer--you could say that if the Universe (all times and all places) was created as whole in one instant , then God crafted us as statues caught in a tableau of sin. If this is the case, we see that if there truly is a heaven or hell, God would arbitrarily be picking and choosing based on even more arbitrary rules. Maybe this is 'just' to Him, but to me and maybe to others, it is not.

Why don't they use the skin-deep X-Ray scanners anymore?

Well, the criticisms I've seen involve a 'dual-substance' theory. That is, the theory that we are composed of crude physical matter as well as ethereal substance--so we'd have a 'mind' and then separate from that a 'brain'. Seems like one huge rationalization to me. The people who I've seen use that argument do so in order to explain our sense of freedom-- but the thing is our sense of freedom can also be a function of how we are physically developed. I just started reading 'The Introduction to the Philosophy of the Mind' to get a better grasp for their arguments--its written by the dualist E.J Lowe.

What is the conscience if not an instinctual or hard-learned body of social rules? Just because we have the ability to observe and theorize about our bodily processes and thoughts does not make those processes transcendent.

What the hell l0rd. Though Stoya is pretty attractive. Further research reveals she's into Sci-fi books, as well as fantasy. ... Shwing.

^Glad you posted that, I was going to go into a long spiel about biological altruism and how social tendencies would be naturally selected for in many cases.

Yes, this way of thinking is entirely irrelevant to us, here and now-- because we feel as if we are choosing what we do. But it's completely relevant if we face an eternity of punishment for our decisions. On a scale as grand as one with a Universal creator and an eternal afterlife, these things need to be taken into account--because the implication is that we were created to go somewhere based on... what? You'd think it'd be the choices you make, but really, it's not. To say that we had free, free will, and that we could change the shape and function of different parts of our brains at our wills would be to ascribe God-like qualities to us. We aren't supposed to be able to shift the laws of physics with our mind. As for the religions in which, yes, the majority of humanity is already destined for Hell-- would you, if you were a heaven-goer, feel bad about this? Would you try and act to help the Hell-goers, and try to defy God (however futile this action may be?).

No, I've not yet explicitly read up on Determinism, but I guess I will. It just doesn't make sense to me for there to be such a thing as free will. Sure, quantum fluctuations could make decisions different in perfectly replicated situations, but those decisions would still be based on things outside of our control. Its not like there's some outside soul plucking at our neurons and making us think and do. --Right, and I'm agnostic.

Shoot, I realized its Christmas. To be clear--I'm not trying to incite flames. Also: So this discussion is based around the assumption that the Abrahamic God is real.

Disclaimer: I'm only speaking of Abrahamic faiths, here. Religion. I thought of it, as most of us do, as a group of simple ideologies meant to spark some moral code and perhaps provide spiritual comfort in an otherwise empty world. I saw it as a body of texts and faiths meant to cushion us from some existential dread. But then I saw that there was a very real problem: the treatment of this life as something transitory--temporary--made it somehow grow less vibrant. The world that we have living proof of, this world, becomes faded; because people just end up waiting for something after. But this realization only served to turn me to another, more depressing problem: what if we assumed God to be real? You might say: "well, then we'd have no problem. God'd be seen as real, and the religious world would go on happy." But I want you to really think about it. Think about the different realms, the different rules. Think about Heaven and Hell, and of our purpose upon this rocky planet. Are we supposed to be here because of a test? It's a gauntlet meant to send our souls to a certain destination, right? Heaven or Hell? But think to yourself why we'd be sent there. It is because of our decisions and choices, correct? But our decisions aren't really in our control. Bear with me here: Our body is built and run off of physical molecules and so is subject to physical law--the same goes for our brains. Our brain, that three pound, oatmeal-textured mess of nerve stewing in our skull, is the source of our consciousness, and the ability to make choices. And if the brain is subject to physical law--the laws of cause and effect, of stimuli and reaction--then so are our decisions. Essentially, all that we do is dependent on how we are made and where we are placed. There really is no free will. That feeling of choice that runs through your head is the natural process of scenario-weighing and pro/con analysis. There never really is a choice, just one outcome that is beneficial to you. It just takes time to get to that choice, and so we are provided with the illusion of 'will'. Whatever 'choices' we make would mirror a Chess-Machine's 'choices' as it weighs different moves and suddenly 'chooses' to send a Knight to E7. Its not really a choice at all. So that brings us back around to Hell and Heaven. If we assume God is real, we are essentially being fated to either eternal torture or eternal pleasure. We have no control over it. Think of an elaborate machine that has one input and two outputs-- and imagine that you place ball bearings into the machine and wait for outcomes. The ball can either splash into a pit of boiling hot water, or land in soft cloudy cotton. But where it goes is dependent on mass. The mass of the bearing interacts with the machine and causes it to be propelled into either the water or the cotton. If a ball is caught in water, is it it's fault? No, it was an inherent design. A manufacturer of the ball bearing would have known that it would be boiled, just as a God would knowingly create humans to be burnt in Hell. To me, that's a little cruel. I don't enjoy double standards or unfair judgments, especially since all of us obey physical law unconditionally. To me, the God I read about and hear about sounds a little terrible. Maybe I just don't know all about him, because he 'works in mysterious ways', but I can't see myself worshipping him, and I don't see why others do, either. To me that's like encouraging an unjust judge (paradoxical, really.) What I'm saying is, I'd be completely indifferent to a God if he existed, based on what I know. But if he really is as he is described (without any of those 'mysterious ways' excuses) I'd move into open rebellion. I'd burn in Hell to prove a point. I'd join the others who are unjustly tossed in there. It's not our fault that we are sinners, or that we refuse divine forgiveness--that's just how we were built. I'd stand under the banner of Humanity and us alone-- I'd place no devotion in any God. I would not be oppressed in such a way. Some might call me in league with the Devil, but all the Devil did (in Islam, in any case-- not sure about the Christian/Jewish histories) was stand up to his power. The Devil refused to bow down to the newly created humans, just as I would refuse to bow down to an Angel. Yes, I'd stand up for us Humans. I'd fight for us, I'd burn for us. I would rebel. The question is; would you? Tell me why or why not-- hopefully this will be a good discussion. Convince me of God's justice; I don't particularly WANT to burn or anything.

"Hey you gotta boyfriend or what?" ^Say this, and with a New Yorker accent. Ideally, you'd have a hotdog dripping mustard all over your shirt and an over-large hat as well.

ImproveEverywhere's Suicide Jumper Oh just watch it. Its brilliant.

So did I ... afterwards. After "what" exactly, this I cannot say for it is quite non PG 13. Wait, what?

Yes, Theravada is the type better loved by me-- They treat Buddha and his teachings just as they were: as a man and his philosophies. They wouldn't dare shape his form with statues and they wouldn't build elaborate temples in his honor, no--a humble stupa with no vestments will do. As for the actual topic: you gave us the definition of conceptual knowledge, now what is perfect wisdom? We may need the meanings of both to compare, unless you're playing some mind game in which we need perfect wisdom to divine what perfect wisdom is.

Seed! If you take, you have to give back. Let the system grow!

Yes, it does seem to me like a 'choice' issue. Equal opportunity sounds good, yes?

Your hair is flippin' ridiculous. In the good way.

People dream of astral projection. They say... it is different. I don't buy it, but your brain's awareness of where your body is can be thrown off. And so you might believe you are where your body is not. I guess that might give a sense of being ethereal. Just slice a lobe or cut a cortex.

Human flesh? Tastes like candied walnut. Also, creutzfeldt-jacob.

Clones don't share consciousnesses. DNA doesn't describe something immaterial, like a soul. Your consciousness, really, is the result of several physical factors, I believe. Mind and body are one and the same. And the body dies.

A man is dead. The circumstances were odd, yes. But it does not mean he was an idiot. Lapses in thought are common while performing repetitive actions (like, say, chewing gum and ripping open packets). There could have been several reasons for death, right?

When, in 2011, they discover that the AIDS virus can be beaten back with high levels of oxytocin and other chemicals involved in love and trust, I shall laugh and laugh and laugh.

A great amount of DMT will be flooded into your brain, and even as you die you dream of an eternity in Heaven. Of course, there is oblivion. But before nonexistence, you experience happy years in what may be seconds. This would be cool. But implausible. This way your general theories of death will play their part--what you think happens will happen. In that last dream.