Resurrection is a false concept

[frangiuliano115]

Yes, I am open mind toward the anything which is error free, so called truth.

Sorry. Didn’t see this before I sent off my other post.

You are not open minded, Bahman. You’re like a lot of liberals. They think they’re open minded, but they’re not.

You want to be open minded only for concepts that are error free and are true. That doesn’t require open mindedness Bahman. Those would necessarily HAVE to be accepted. You don’t have to be open minded toward death. Everyone accepts it as a truth.

Open mindedness means to take an idea and mull it over and say, hmmmm. Instead you just automatically turn every idea down.

That is not correct way to explain my approach toward reality.

Okay. If you don’t consider yourself an atheist that’s already a good sign. But then why do you fight everything sent your way? If you turn down every idea, again, it means you’re not receptive at all.

I am open to spirituality as well.

What is spirituality??

Well, if you want to believe on something then there are numerous religions to believe, why pick up Christianity?

Now there’s a question! Because in no other religion does the founder say he is God. I go back to my original argument: Either Jesus was God or He was a madman. And one shouldn’t be the disciple of a madman. Buddha and Confucius did not claim to be God, Mohammad did not claim to be God. Jesus claimed it and the resurrection proved it. But, alas, you have to believe in the resurrection.

Another reason I believe Christianity to be the right religion is because it gives me the best explanation of why there is good and evil in the world.

And, the most important reason of all: Once you come to believe in Jesus and His cross, your life changes and all the concepts chrisitanity teaches become REAL for you. This truth you’re seeking…

So, yes, other religions seem like nonsense to me. But I respect anyone who is TRULY seeking God. God will be found.

Then what is the purpose of a philosophy forum?

It’s good to discuss different ideas. What I’m saying is that you can go beyond the idea to unknowns. At this point it all becomes conjecture since no real scientific or religious principle can be applied. What’s the use of having 40 pages on conjecture?? But, if anyone could come up with a new idea, it would be interesting.

That is something which is called ignorance and it is not beautiful.

I won’t take that as an insult, Bahman, but as ignorance on your part.

You see, if you want to be spiritual, let alone christian, you’re going to HAVE to be a bit trusting and believing in concepts you can’t really understand or quite be able to find their location.

Which brings me back to my original position that I feel you’re more of an atheist than a searcher.

Fran

 

[GEddie]

Aquinas said the soul must take the form of the body…many concepts from Thomas’ days have changed a bit since we’ve learned more. I brought up the point of the spirit in man. This is understood differently today, in the sense that we understand it as an integral part of man. Aquinas only spoke to the soul and body of man. I must say that, yes, if you take Aquinas’ view that the two are intertwined, then separation can become an issue. Although we must accept that God can do anything.

Separation of soul from spirit is not an issue. We have no evidence that that ever occurs and only a few relatively mysterious Scriptures to suggest that it can.

What we know as separable is the body, and that is what is involved in resurrection.

“Form of the body” is a hopelessly confusing term now that most of us are no longer Thomists nor read Latin. Today, that would be understood incorrectly as an outer skin-shape or moldline.

How about a NDE? How does a person see himself outside his body?

It’s not established that that ever occurs. It is still possible that that is just a dream of the breathless head.

The “I” (id?) of a person is indeed a mystery. When you refer to “I”, what is it you’re referring to?

Well, **I **certainly wouldn’t equate “I” or “me” with the id! At least not in the Freudian sense.

The difficulty arises because, apart from the issue of death, these terms would self-evidently include the body. This is why resurrection is so important.

ICXC NIKA

 

[frangiuliano115]

Separation of soul from spirit is not an issue. We have no evidence that that ever occurs and only a few relatively mysterious Scriptures to suggest that it can.

What we know as separable is the body, and that is what is involved in resurrection.

“Form of the body” is a hopelessly confusing term now that most of us are no longer Thomists nor read Latin. Today, that would be understood incorrectly as an outer skin-shape or moldline.

It’s not established that that ever occurs. It is still possible that that is just a dream of the breathless head.

Well, **I **certainly wouldn’t equate “I” or “me” with the id! At least not in the Freudian sense.

The difficulty arises because, apart from the issue of death, these terms would self-evidently include the body. This is why resurrection is so important.

ICXC NIKA

The souls definitely gets separated at death and this is the issue. And of course, God will “find it”. The only other solution would e soul sleep and not only do we not teach this, but it would be difficult for me to accept it based on the New Testament writings. I put the id with a question mark because I certainly do not have a decent understanding of philosophy and at the moment I wasn’t even sure of remembering what it was!

I also agree with you that the NDE might be a dream. I have a friend who went through something like this and she swears that she was aware of what was going on in the room while she was unconscious or dead or whatever. I don’t like to dwell too much on these things and only bring it up for purposes of this discussion.

So, to be clear, at death we’re left with only our soul and spirit, or spirit soul (take your pick) and at the resurrection we are reunited with our body, but it’ll be a transfigured body like that of Jesus or Moses and Elijah on Mt. Tabor.

As far as I’m concerned, this is all that matters!

Fran

 

[clem456]

I am afraid that a quote from Bible doesn’t help. You need to provide an argument. So I repeat again: If soul and body combined are one act of being then soul cannot exist without body. Moreover soul as an immaterial entity does not have any location hence it cannot be locate hence resurrection is impossible.

If you don’t believe in the reality of the soul, why do you even ask the question?

If you do believe in Christian soul, then we believe the soul does not evolve in a material way like a body. The soul is infused into the body directly by God.
So there is simply no question to be asked. If God creates something invisible and iinfuses it into a body, he can store on the “soul rack” for a few millennia and reunite it with the body, AS HE WILLS.

You don’t believe. No problem.
THERE IS NO ARGUMENT, like you are asking for. Get over it.

 

[Bahman]

Well, you have used this statement as a catch-all “proof” for much of what you claim. The problem is that you haven’t shown it to be true, you merely keep asserting it as if it is self-evident. It isn’t.

I suspect you are confused about the difference between “necessary for” and “necessary” in itself or a se.

Perhaps consciousness is necessary for knowledge of anything, but that is far from showing that all conscious beings are necessary.

I was born a number of years ago and attained consciousness some time after that. When I go to sleep at night I lose consciousness. I have been rendered unconscious a few times in my life. I assume that when I am unconscious the universe goes on without me because every morning when I wake up I become conscious of the things around me. I assume they persisted in existence when I was asleep and unconscious. I also assume this is the experience of all human beings around me.

Now you want me (and everyone else) to believe that the universe goes out of existence when I lose consciousness - that it is ontologically dependent upon my being conscious of it. Really?

I can’t know that that is what happens and you only assume that it does. That, my friend, is where your argument that consciousness is necessary - in an absolute sense - comes to a screeching halt. No, consciousness (at least not mine nor yours) is not necessary.

Apparently you didn’t think hard enough on the question of whether necessary things are merely possible.

If anything is MERELY possible, it can’t be necessary, now can it?
(Think on this a little more. Perhaps it will penetrate, perhaps not.
Perhaps it will only go where it will go. Wherever that is.)

Consciousness is the basic element of cosmos. It is needed for any change. Things keep changing when you are unconscious. I don’t know how you deduce that universe cease to exist when you are unconscious.

 

[Bahman]

I’m sorry Bahman. I don’t understand.

Are you saying the others who thought they were God were mislead?

Yes.

If I think I’m Queen Elizabeth does that mean I’m mislead or that I’m a bit batty?
You think someone could convince me that I’m the Queen?

Yes. Satan can convince you that you are God.

How about a NDE? How does a person see himself outside his body? The “I” (id?) of a person is indeed a mystery. When you refer to “I”, what is it you’re referring to? Where is this “I”? If we want to give it a location, it has to be in the brain. But it’s not a part of the material part of the brain.

What we call I is consciousness which is the essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.

Think of a person with extreme brain damage. Are they still a person? Will God be able to fix that problem upon their death? Do you think they’ll be brain damaged in heaven? I don’t think so. Again, God can do all. This may be too simplistic for you, but it’s the truth.

A person with brain damage cannot experience since his/her connection with reality is disrupted.

Are we just a bunch of atoms and neurons and whatever else? Like a rock, for instance. Or are we something more?

Any being is conscious including atoms and neurons. A person as a whole is different conscious being.

You see Bahman, it would never end.

I think that I present a simple picture of what we are.

And with the Jesus question. Do you believe Jesus is God?

Your answer is important.

Fran

He was not God. God does not need to incarnate as human being to convey his message and cannot die.

 

[Bahman]

If you don’t believe in the reality of the soul, why do you even ask the question?

If you do believe in Christian soul, then we believe the soul does not evolve in a material way like a body. The soul is infused into the body directly by God.
So there is simply no question to be asked. If God creates something invisible and iinfuses it into a body, he can store on the “soul rack” for a few millennia and reunite it with the body, AS HE WILLS.

You don’t believe. No problem.
THERE IS NO ARGUMENT, like you are asking for. Get over it.

The problem is that soul and body as separate things could not interact by they could exist separately. Soul and body as one act of being could interact but they could not exist separately.

 

[You]

The problem is that soul and body as separate things could not interact by they could exist separately. Soul and body as one act of being could interact but they could not exist separately.

There are two realms Bahman. They both intersect in the material world. When the soul leaves the body it exists in the spiritual realm. It is located in the spiritual realm and takes up spiritual room there and maintains its previous form of the body as shape and personality.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Yes.

Yes. Satan can convince you that you are God.

What we call I is consciousness which is the essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.

A person with brain damage cannot experience since his/her connection with reality is disrupted.

Any being is conscious including atoms and neurons. A person as a whole is different conscious being.

I think that I present a simple picture of what we are.

He was not God. God does not need to incarnate as human being to convey his message and cannot die.

Thanks for responding. You say make some pretty outrageous statements!
I’m not too sure I can reply to you.
You didn’t say what it means to you to be spiritual. It means that part of you that is in touch with God. I’m not sure you’re in touch with God; although that is certainly not my judgement to make.

You say satan can convince me I’m the Queen. And I’d be crazy, just like I said.
A person with brain damage will be perfect in heaven; apparently you don’t think so.

I don’t have a good picture of what you think we are. And you don’t think Jesus was God. This is important because everything rests on the resurrection and if you don’t believe in that, then what are we talking about here?

Do you even believe in an afterlife? I’m doubting it. Maybe you believe in soul sleep. That’s okay. Maybe you’re a Jehovah Witness or some other religion that believes in soul sleep. It’s your prerogative.

What else would you like us not to prove to you?
Read your signature line every now and then.

Fran
P.S. Just saw your last two posts. It’s okay if you want to believe that body and soul could not exist separate from each other. But it’s incorrect for you to expect us, here, to prove to you that they can. We have faith - you don’t and therein lies the problem.

 

[utunumsint]

Continuation of Bahman’s belief system:

1-Everything we experience can be divided into objects and ideas.
2-Ideas only exist in the mind.
3-The mind is divided into the subconscious and the conscious.
4-Only the conscious mind actually experiences ideas.
New 5-Any being that can say the word “I” is consciousness (self conscious?).This self consciousness is the essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.
6-The conscious mind (I presume) either

• experiences ideas drawn from the subconscious.
• experiences ideas converted from sensory stimulus.

7-This conversion process from sensory stimuli to an idea is from one form to another form. Perhaps from the form Object to the form Idea?
8.Both objects and ideas are material things.
9.As material things you can physically locate them. For example, I can point to a dog or, if I was a skilled enough neurosurgeon, I could open up the human brain and point to the idea of dog.
10.A skilled neurosurgeon could even point to the area of the brain where the idea of Dog is located that corresponds to the subconscious and where that idea would be located in the conscious part of the brain.
New 11-Atoms and Neurons are conscious (self conscious???).
New 12-People are also conscious, but in a different way.

I have to say, I’m getting a little lost here. Perhaps you can elaborate?

God bless,
Ut

 

[clem456]

The problem is that soul and body as separate things could not interact by they could exist separately. Soul and body as one act of being could interact but they could not exist separately.

So I hear you say many times. You have a well established belief that we do not share in this area.

So?

All you do is assert your beliefs without proof.

Prove your argument.

 

[utunumsint]

So I hear you say many times. You have a well established belief that we do not share in this area.

So?

All you do is assert your beliefs without proof.

Prove your argument.

I agree with this. Bahman has built a straw man of our arguments for the resurrection based on his own metaphysical and philosophical assumptions. Assumptions that we would reject or at least easily find arguments against. I have been trying to bring these assumptions out so that folks can understand where he is coming from.

I think being open about how we arrive at a certain conclusion and trying to understand how another arrives at a certain conclusion is a form of charity. At the very least, no meaningful dialog can begin until this essential groundwork has been accomplished.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Peter_Plato]

Consciousness is the basic element of cosmos. It is needed for any change. Things keep changing when you are unconscious. I don’t know how you deduce that universe cease to exist when you are unconscious.

So how do you “deduce” that the universe continues to exist when you are unconscious?

This is particularly “ripe” when you claim consciousness is “needed for any change” and is the “basic element of the cosmos.”

Whose “consciousness” is “the basic element of the cosmos?” Yours? Mine? Ours? Someone else’s? God’s?

How would YOU know that from your consciousness alone, since, presumably, you ONLY have access to your consciousness and no one else’s?

I am not deducing that the universe ceases to exist when I am unconscious, I am supposing that would be deduced from your position. Since, YOU claim, consciousness is “needed for any change,” you don’t specify whose consciousness and since YOUR own consciousness would seem the only consciousness you could possibly say anything about, it would seem to follow that when you go unconscious (asleep or lose consciousness) no change can then occur. AND since the universe has as its “basic element,” consciousness, it would seem your or my lacking consciousness entails that the universe itself would go out of existence like turning out the cosmic light.

This isn’t what I think, it seems to derive from what YOU do. Correct me if I am wrong, if you wish, but please don’t arbitrarily make up the rules of logic and metaphysics as you go. Those rules have to be provably true not to just exist in your mind as capricious minions that create your world view as you go or wherever they take you.

Begin by proving beyond a doubt that “Consciousness is the basic element of the cosmos.”

How can WE know that for certain? That does not mean that YOU have been convinced according to YOUR rules of “logic” and premises YOU decide are true, it means anyone ought to be convinced by standard rules of logic and by self-evident or commonly held premises.

Does consciousness take up space? Is it locatable? If not, you would seem to have the same problem with it as you claim God has with the soul.

I’ve never seen it listed on any periodic table of elements? Is it an inert gas or metal?

 

[GEddie]

In human life, consciousness is a body function.

Unless you believe in God and angelic life, there is every evidence that the universe does just fine without consciousness acting.

ICXC NIKA

 

[frangiuliano115]

Continuation of Bahman’s belief system:

1-Everything we experience can be divided into objects and ideas.
2-Ideas only exist in the mind.
3-The mind is divided into the subconscious and the conscious.
4-Only the conscious mind actually experiences ideas.
New 5-Any being that can say the word “I” is consciousness (self conscious?).This self consciousness is the essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.
6-The conscious mind (I presume) either

• experiences ideas drawn from the subconscious.
• experiences ideas converted from sensory stimulus.

7-This conversion process from sensory stimuli to an idea is from one form to another form. Perhaps from the form Object to the form Idea?
8.Both objects and ideas are material things.
9.As material things you can physically locate them. For example, I can point to a dog or, if I was a skilled enough neurosurgeon, I could open up the human brain and point to the idea of dog.
10.A skilled neurosurgeon could even point to the area of the brain where the idea of Dog is located that corresponds to the subconscious and where that idea would be located in the conscious part of the brain.
New 11-Atoms and Neurons are conscious (self conscious???).
New 12-People are also conscious, but in a different way.

I have to say, I’m getting a little lost here. Perhaps you can elaborate?

God bless,
Ut

Thanks for the enlightenment.
I can’t keep up!

Going to go make dinner. Maybe I should ask my pots and pans how they’re feeling today?

Fran

 

[You]

I had spaghetti.

 

[Bahman]

Thanks for responding. You say make some pretty outrageous statements!
I’m not too sure I can reply to you.
You didn’t say what it means to you to be spiritual.

I call the rest of creation we cannot experience spiritual.

It means that part of you that is in touch with God. I’m not sure you’re in touch with God; although that is certainly not my judgement to make.

I do believe in God.

I don’t have a good picture of what you think we are. And you don’t think Jesus was God. This is important because everything rests on the resurrection and if you don’t believe in that, then what are we talking about here?

Life continuous without any need for resurrection after death.

Do you even believe in an afterlife? I’m doubting it. Maybe you believe in soul sleep. That’s okay. Maybe you’re a Jehovah Witness or some other religion that believes in soul sleep. It’s your prerogative.

I do believe in life after death.

P.S. Just saw your last two posts. It’s okay if you want to believe that body and soul could not exist separate from each other. But it’s incorrect for you to expect us, here, to prove to you that they can. We have faith - you don’t and therein lies the problem.

I do believe in consciousness which is essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.

 

[Bahman]

Continuation of Bahman’s belief system:

I have to correct some of your points.

1-Everything we experience can be divided into objects and ideas.

Correct.

2-Ideas only exist in the mind.

Correct.

3-The mind is divided into the subconscious and the conscious.

Correct. Subconsciousness is where that ideas resides.

4-Only the conscious mind actually experiences ideas.

Correct.

New 5-Any being that can say the word “I” is consciousness (self conscious?).This self consciousness is the essence of any being with the ability to experience and affect reality.

Correct.

6-The conscious mind (I presume) either

• experiences ideas drawn from the subconscious.
• experiences ideas converted from sensory stimulus.

Correct.

7-This conversion process from sensory stimuli to an idea is from one form to another form. Perhaps from the form Object to the form Idea?

Yes. This process is call conceptualizing. It is however not clear to me how this is done.

8.Both objects and ideas are material things.

Ideas are forms which resides in subconsciousness and can be experienced by consciousness.

9.As material things you can physically locate them. For example, I can point to a dog or, if I was a skilled enough neurosurgeon, I could open up the human brain and point to the idea of dog.

Correct.

10.A skilled neurosurgeon could even point to the area of the brain where the idea of Dog is located that corresponds to the subconscious and where that idea would be located in the conscious part of the brain.

An idea can be located in conscious mind only when an idea is experienced.

New 11-Atoms and Neurons are conscious (self conscious???).

Correct. Everything that experience and affect is conscious.

New 12-People are also conscious, but in a different way.

Correct. We as human being have collective experience.

I have to say, I’m getting a little lost here. Perhaps you can elaborate?

God bless,
Ut

Which part do have problem?

 

[Bahman]

So I hear you say many times. You have a well established belief that we do not share in this area.

So?

All you do is assert your beliefs without proof.

Prove your argument.

I already made my argument. That is your turn to provide an argument against mine. So I repeat again: The problem is that soul and body as separate things could not interact but they could exist separately. Soul and body as one act of being could interact but they could not exist separately.

 

[Bahman]

So how do you “deduce” that the universe continues to exist when you are unconscious?

This is particularly “ripe” when you claim consciousness is “needed for any change” and is the “basic element of the cosmos.”

There are other conscious beings.

Whose “consciousness” is “the basic element of the cosmos?” Yours? Mine? Ours? Someone else’s? God’s?

Everybody.

How would YOU know that from your consciousness alone, since, presumably, you ONLY have access to your consciousness and no one else’s?

I deduce others as conscious beings.

I am not deducing that the universe ceases to exist when I am unconscious, I am supposing that would be deduced from your position. Since, YOU claim, consciousness is “needed for any change,” you don’t specify whose consciousness and since YOUR own consciousness would seem the only consciousness you could possibly say anything about, it would seem to follow that when you go unconscious (asleep or lose consciousness) no change can then occur. AND since the universe has as its “basic element,” consciousness, it would seem your or my lacking consciousness entails that the universe itself would go out of existence like turning out the cosmic light.

There are consciousness which in charge of changes in cosmos when we are unconscious.

Begin by proving beyond a doubt that “Consciousness is the basic element of the cosmos.”

How can WE know that for certain? That does not mean that YOU have been convinced according to YOUR rules of “logic” and premises YOU decide are true, it means anyone ought to be convinced by standard rules of logic and by self-evident or commonly held premises.

I think my position is clear now.

Does consciousness take up space? Is it locatable? If not, you would seem to have the same problem with it as you claim God has with the soul.

Consciousness doesn’t take up any space yet it can experience when there is something to be experience and then can affect reality.