Biological Predisposition To Faith? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-07-2008, 04:31 AM   #21
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:13 AM


Are you ascribing a physiological response from something in the pleasure center of the brain to spiritual sensitivity? Where is the peer reviewed study on the experience of the deaf and blind experience?

If I want to feel more love and I would just take MDMA.
__________________

A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 06:56 AM   #22
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,786
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I am not sure that it is completely separate, taking an phenomena that has in the past been hoisted as a proof of God and putting it into a natural domain removes the necessity of God. While it can't answer the question of God as a first cause or a guiding hand acting through probabilities it does remove God from the direct workings of the world.

Understanding how the brain work has as little to do with the existence of God as evolutionary biology.
It's not an all-or-nothing proposition here. If brain chemistry can influence whether one is religious or atheist, it can most certainly influence one's flavor of religiosity too. And keep in mind here, I'm not talking at all about deus ex machina workings here; just the science.

This level of nuance may not be what the scientists here had in mind, but hey...that's science.
__________________

melon is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 08:36 AM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Oh I am all about the nuance, that last sentence in the quote has a few very deliberate meanings in there and at least one of them rather complementary to you.

I didn't respond to the spectrum of faith on account of a misplaced delete key. But the general gist was going to be that if I was raised Christian, lived in a more religious society then I may well have a faith in God and it would potentially be reinforced by some of those Christian apologetic arguments. Arguments why you should believe in spite of doubts are not out there to cater for a simple faith. People can always find a religion to fit their temperament and it would make sense that it a consequence of how their brains work.

I think one overlooked thing is that if a certain proportion is always lukewarm to belief then there will always be the faithful. Any utopian ideals about forging a purely atheistic society ultimately demand force or a suitable substitute entity for deification. I have no interest in such a society, it demands undesirable means to reach an undesirable end.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 12:08 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM
I think it's funny watching a Darwinian proponent and near agnostic debate the finer points of this subject.

diamond is offline  
Old 04-07-2008, 12:09 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


MDMA.
That's fake love brother.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 10:24 AM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
I think it's funny watching a Darwinian proponent and near agnostic debate the finer points of this subject.

Naturally funny, to the untrained eye perhaps

But both Melon and I have some comprehension of where the other is coming from (which is basically the same point on this topic). I know that we are both perfectly comfortable with what we believe and would never be as impolite as to expect the other to change.

And isn't it interesting that the atheist in this argument is cast as the Darwinian proponent, are you incapable of understanding that materialism and atheism are separate from the evolutionary biology. Melon by virtue of not being a moron can view evolution as being a means to a divine end. I have the luxury of unbelief and can simply marvel at it's splendor. But pity the poor fool who is so married a simple faith that demands a simple God for being the reason for his simple existence; he could never actually have a stimulating conversation about anything of significance.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 09:54 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
[B]
And isn't it interesting that the atheist in this argument is cast as the Darwinian proponent, are you incapable of understanding that materialism and atheism are separate from the evolutionary biology.

But atheists have taken the theory of evolution -- injected their own philosophies and politics into it -- to create their own 100% materialistic version of Genesis. Which is then masqueraded as 100% science, which it most certainly is not.

Nothing in the theory or science of evolution is hostile or disproves in anyway a supernatural Creation or Design. That is only the atheistic spin on Darwin. Evolutionary science does explain why older fossils show less complex forms and accounts for the unity of all life on earth. But evolution and biology alone can never explain the origin of life, how the unconscious became conscious, human morality or what happens after death.

Not that we shouldn't try anyhow. By all means, let's fill in the details. We're all just seeking the truth right?
INDY500 is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 10:00 PM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM
Also Darwin was not an Atheist.



<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 10:13 PM   #29
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,786
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
But atheists have taken the theory of evolution -- injected their own philosophies and politics into it -- to create their own 100% materialistic version of Genesis. Which is then masqueraded as 100% science, which it most certainly is not.

Nothing in the theory or science of evolution is hostile or disproves in anyway a supernatural Creation or Design. That is only the atheistic spin on Darwin. Evolutionary science does explain why older fossils show less complex forms and accounts for the unity of all life on earth. But evolution and biology alone can never explain the origin of life, how the unconscious became conscious, human morality or what happens after death.

Not that we shouldn't try anyhow. By all means, let's fill in the details. We're all just seeking the truth right?
Science--and, by extension, evolution--is inherently disinterested in theistic explanations, not because they are hostile to religion (and Darwin, as you have loosely implied, was not hostile to it either; but you also didn't see "God" being plastered all over "The Origin of Species" either). It is because science is inherently uninterested in what is not material. You may make some kind of trite, coy slur that science is "materialistic"; but it is what it is. Religion does not conform to reality any more than science conforms to notions of faith; and it is fully within the rights of man to mix the two privately. That man, however, should always know that they are still two different subjects. Darwin certainly understood it, as did the medieval intellectual giants--many of whom were Christian and Islamic clerics in their own right--before him.
melon is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 10:52 PM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Naturally funny, to the untrained eye perhaps

But both Melon and I have some comprehension of where the other is coming from (which is basically the same point on this topic). I know that we are both perfectly comfortable with what we believe and would never be as impolite as to expect the other to change.

And isn't it interesting that the atheist in this argument is cast as the Darwinian proponent, are you incapable of understanding that materialism and atheism are separate from the evolutionary biology. Melon by virtue of not being a moron can view evolution as being a means to a divine end. I have the luxury of unbelief and can simply marvel at it's splendor. But pity the poor fool who is so married a simple faith that demands a simple God for being the reason for his simple existence; he could never actually have a stimulating conversation about anything of significance.
Actully you and Melon are more connected at the hip and I'm not bothered.

It may behoove both of you gentleman to know that the LDS faith believe in evolution to a degree more that Orthodox Christianity and was part of Joseph Smith's struggle.

It was revealed to him, by God that the ex nihilo creation was inaccurate, a long held belief of Orthodox Christianity.

Here's what he said it the early 1800s as it was revealed to him regarding matter, the universe and the creation:

God created the universe out of chaos, "which is Element and in which dwells all the glory"

"God is related to space and time, and did not create them from nothing. Change occurs through intelligence. The universe is governed by law. There were two creations: All things were made "spiritually" before they were made "naturally" (Moses 3:5). Through his Son, God is the Creator of multiple worlds. God is the Father of the human spirits that inhabit his creations. His creations have no end".

"the Creation is placed in a much larger context of ongoing creations of innumerable inhabited earths with their respective heavens.... "And worlds without number have I created…for mine own purpose;....... And as one earth shall pass away, and the heavens thereof even so shall another come; and there is no end to my works"

Also Joseph Smith was granted knowledge that the whole nebulous idea of the Trintarian doctrine was man made, that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost were 3 seperate holy beings or enities united for 1 purpose, another idea refuted that had been forced down the throats of post 1st century Christians giving every believer of God a rubics cube only understanding of their Creator at very best.

Here's what i could find on that subject:

The doctrine of ex nihilo creation has been the traditional Christian explanation. In recent discussion of the subject, many Jewish scholars agreed that the belief in an ex nihilo creation is not to be found before the Hellenistic period, while Christian scholars see no evidence of this doctrine in the Christian church until the end of the second century A.D. The rejection of ex nihilo creation in the teaching of the Latter-day Saints thus accords with the evidence of the earliest understanding of the Creation in ancient Israel and in early Christianity. Similarly, Latter-day Saints have understood such biblical passages as John 9:2 and Jeremiah 1:4-5 to refer to individual premortal existence, with implications for subsequent earthly existence. In support of this, it may be pointed out that various Christians and Christian groups in the early Christian centuries taught the same doctrine (cf. Origen, De principiis 1:7; 2:8; 4:1), and that it is also to be found in Jewish belief of the same period, including Philo (De mutatione nominum 39; De opificio mundi 51; De cherubim 32); in some apocryphal writings (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20; 15:3); and among the Essenes (Josephus, Jewish War 2.8.11, as well as in the Jewish Talmud and Midrash).

So, my evloutionist and agnostic friend ponder those thoughts and get back to me.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 10:56 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
[B]

It is because science is inherently uninterested in what is not material. You may make some kind of trite, coy slur that science is "materialistic"; but it is what it is.
Right. Science operates in the empirical domain of the observable. It's realm the material or natural world. The supernatural, if it exists, might not be observable by the same methods or bound by the same laws of physics and time that govern us.

Therefore, science alone cannot be atheistic, only, as you say, disinterested. So, the atheism and hostility towards religion now associated with the theory of evolution can only be borne out of ideology, not science.

That was my only point.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 11:10 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond

"the Creation is placed in a much larger context of ongoing creations of innumerable inhabited earths with their respective heavens.... <>
I don't argue faith or doctrine unless asked to but this really catches my eye as it seems to fall into the physical universe.
Is there any physical evidence at all (geological, astronomical) to support this?
INDY500 is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 11:26 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


I don't argue faith or doctrine unless asked to but this really catches my eye as it seems to fall into the physical universe.
Is there any physical evidence at all (geological, astronomical) to support this?
If you take a leap at things like Stone Hedge, ancient paintings of flying saucers and so forth one could speculate, however we're told that it's really not perinent to man's salvation.

Things that matter are not how many planets God has created or is about to create but Faith in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ and understanding He is both the Messiah and Savior of this world and almost equally important show that faith by and helping our fellow men.

<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-08-2008, 11:53 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Nicely said.

I just find "innumerable inhabited earths" interesting. And not just because Genesis 1:1 reads "the heavens and the earth." Implying only one.
Are the earths, as you understand it, inhabited concurrently or consecutively?
Because the former would signify extraterrestrial life which might be contacted or might be trying to contact us -- while the latter would seem to promise a continued physical, as opposed to spiritual, life beyond death on this earth.

Just curious, fell free to drop the matter if you wish.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 04-09-2008, 12:04 AM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

So, the atheism and hostility towards religion now associated with the theory of evolution can only be borne out of ideology, not science.


don't you have this backwards? insofar as science is disinterested in religion/theism, whereas religion seems to feel itself to be under siege from science and that the hostility is mostly perceived by the devout, it's not actually there (just disinterest ... which in and of itself might be maddening ... "take me seriously!" a fundamentalist might cry). certainly there are aggressive atheists, but most actual scientists are simply uninterested in science and their disdain for fabrications like Intelligent Design aren't so much due to their theistic claims but to their anti-science, anti-intellectual agendas.
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 04-09-2008, 12:16 AM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Nicely said.

I just find "innumerable inhabited earths" interesting. And not just because Genesis 1:1 reads "the heavens and the earth." Implying only one.
Are the earths, as you understand it, inhabited concurrently or consecutively?
Because the former would signify extraterrestrial life which might be contacted or might be trying to contact us -- while the latter would seem to promise a continued physical, as opposed to spiritual, life beyond death on this earth.

Just curious, fell free to drop the matter if you wish.
Don't know, I want to say consecutively as far as our finite understanding is concerned. Also I could surmise is that God is the only God of this earth and that is all we really need to focus on.

I think God would focus on one planet at a time too, for the very simple reason that my drama alone with my heavenly petitions could freeze the universe in it's tracks.



<>
diamond is offline  
Old 04-09-2008, 07:40 AM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,786
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Nicely said.

I just find "innumerable inhabited earths" interesting. And not just because Genesis 1:1 reads "the heavens and the earth." Implying only one.
Are the earths, as you understand it, inhabited concurrently or consecutively?
Because the former would signify extraterrestrial life which might be contacted or might be trying to contact us -- while the latter would seem to promise a continued physical, as opposed to spiritual, life beyond death on this earth.

Just curious, fell free to drop the matter if you wish.
Watch "Battlestar Galactica" sometime. It is very loosely based on obscure Mormon views on this subject. The creator of the original 1978 series, Glen A. Larson, is a Mormon himself.

Here's a very detailed essay on the subject, if you're interested:

http://www.michaellorenzen.com/galactica.html
melon is offline  
Old 04-09-2008, 08:45 AM   #38
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 01:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Watch "Battlestar Galactica" sometime. It is very loosely based on obscure Mormon views on this subject. The creator of the original 1978 series, Glen A. Larson, is a Mormon himself.

Here's a very detailed essay on the subject, if you're interested:

http://www.michaellorenzen.com/galactica.html
Yes and before there was Logan's Run in the 1970s that LDS folk warmed up to, rumored to have a few LDS producers.





Because the LDS are Unorthodox Christians we automatically think outside of the box.

Another example:

One of the most popular self help books of all time is called:

The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen R Covey, a devout Mormon.

It's a staple in the business world that CEOs and executives are encouraged to read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sev...fective_People

What most people don't realize outside of the LDS religion is that all the ideas or 7 Habits that Covey uses can be found in the Book of Mormon.



diamond is offline  
Old 04-09-2008, 09:35 AM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:13 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500



But atheists have taken the theory of evolution -- injected their own philosophies and politics into it -- to create their own 100% materialistic version of Genesis. Which is then masqueraded as 100% science, which it most certainly is not.

Nothing in the theory or science of evolution is hostile or disproves in anyway a supernatural Creation or Design. That is only the atheistic spin on Darwin. Evolutionary science does explain why older fossils show less complex forms and accounts for the unity of all life on earth. But evolution and biology alone can never explain the origin of life, how the unconscious became conscious, human morality or what happens after death.

Not that we shouldn't try anyhow. By all means, let's fill in the details. We're all just seeking the truth right?
You are wrong, evolution provides a mechanism for the origin of new species and of a biological trait like sentience without the need of God. The universe functions as if God does not exist, God doesn't answers the questions at all. You take it as a matter of faith that there is life after death but everything points to the brain being the seat of conciousness and self; when the brain shuts down the person ceases to exist.
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-09-2008, 03:25 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
[B]You are wrong, evolution provides a mechanism for the origin of new species
Mechanism for microevolution yes, but title aside, did Darwin actually document the "origin" of a single species? Even kick-starting natural selection by intelligent design (Man's in this case) breeders have never been able to breed across lines to create a new species. Lots of spectacular hybrids and interesting polyploids but the end result is still a horse, dog, fly or tomato.
But even so, what if someday we can? Well, evolution still will not provide a mechanism for the origin of life or the uniqueness of Man.
Quote:
The universe functions as if God does not exist,
Or it functions exactly like God exists.
From the singularity of the creation of all matter from nothing 15 billion years ago to our anthropic position in it.
Christians have searched for a unified, ordered universe because we believe a rational God would create just such a world. Others believed that the heavens, mountains or seas themselves were deities, or that nature was an illusion and thus inaccessible to inquiry.
Physics, chemistry, biology and astronomy has undercut those notions, but not the Christian notion of nature and Man and their origins.
__________________

INDY500 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×