Zygotes and heaven?

[Cbailey2]

Phantasm,

You are never going to have an acceptable answer to your question because no matter what it is going to involve faith - faith in God’s existence (or not), faith in the existence of that soul (or not). There is simply no fact to substantiate the existence or non-existence of a soul in a zygote/embryo/fetus/baby/16 year old/45 year old. Faith begins where fact ends.

From what I gather from your comments, you can’t accept a painful, flawed world in which there is a God. Your only explanation for pain and suffering is that a) there is no God or b) if there is one, He is an #$%hole.

You evidently know some scripture but you are poorly served by any use of the Bible if you don’t understand that God is Love. He created us and gave us free will because He wanted us to share in that love. Why did He create us knowing that we would fall away - that some of us would be damned? Because that is the consequence of free will and a risk worth taking for love. Love is not something that can be forced on someone - puppets and slaves do not love. Love must be freely given - it can not be seized, or programmed into someone. He hoped for us to share in His love and to share it with others.

God does not damn people; we choose to reject God. He has destined all of us for communion with Him - that is the purpose of our creation - but he has left it up to us whether or not we will fulfill our destiny. Yes, he know which ones of us will choose His love and which will reject it, but do not confuse omniscience with agency.

In the end, we all have a choice and that’s the whole point.

 

[phantasm]

There was a positive assertion made that the beliefs of the Church are simply made up.

They are made up, especially Mary’s assumption. Mary’s assumption is not contained in the Bible, ( the Bible of course, written and made up my man).

 

[vz71]

They are made up, especially Mary’s assumption. Mary’s assumption is not contained in the Bible, ( the Bible of course, written and made up my man).

And your proof that this is ‘made up’?

You do realize that positive assertions without the force of some backing erodes credibility…right?

 

[phantasm]

I stand corrected, Mary’s assumption is in the Bible ( I just forgot) and her assumption into heaven, is an undeniable and absolute fact.

The Bible, is the inspired word of God, in that, there is absolutely no doubt on heaven or on earth.



I take my leave.

 

[Abbadon]

Actually, no -those are only elemental gods - they have power over specific elements of the Creation, but they were not thought to have actually created anything, themselves. They simply have dominion over one part of it. Those who believed in those gods did not believe in a comprehensible universe - they thought that everything that happened was due to some argument that the gods were having among themselves, or some incomprehensible fit of temper - that things were not actually predictable or quantifiable.

It’s only when they began to believe in a single Creator that we see them starting to figure out how the universe works - that a storm is not simply Neptune throwing a fit (and requiring some kind of virgin sacrifice to appease him and make the storm stop), but rather, the predictable result of the meeting of hot and cold air - cold air being caused by evaporation of water, and hot air being caused by reflected sunlight from a dark surface - and that if you simply wait long enough, the storm will run out of energy, and stop by itself - no virgin sacrifices necessary - that the Creator has a purpose for the storm, and if you just stay in the cave until it’s over, you’ll be just fine.

wikipedia:

According to Norse myth, the beginning of life was fire and ice, with the existence of only two worlds: Muspelheim and Niflheim. When the warm air of Muspelheim hit the cold ice of Niflheim, the jötunn Ymir and the icy cow Audhumla were created. Ymir’s foot bred a son and a man and a woman emerged from his armpits, making Ymir the progenitor of the Jotun. Whilst Ymir slept, the intense heat from Muspelheim made him sweat, and he sweated out Surtr, a jötunn of fire. Later Ymir woke and drank Audhumbla’s milk. Whilst he drank, the cow Audhumbla licked on a salt stone. On the first day after this a man’s hair appeared on the stone, on the second day a head and on the third day an entire man emerged from the stone. His name was Búri and with an unknown jötunn female he fathered Bor, the father of the three gods Odin, Vili and Ve.

Yeap you were right about the Norse creation myth, and here I was thinking that it was the all father… It just seemed that natural forced created the universe…
wikipedia:

Among the most important Egyptian myths were the creation myths. While there were several different creation myths, they all shared common elements: an infinite, lifeless ocean which preceded the creation, and a pyramidal mound of land which was the first thing to emerge from this ocean.[28] However, the creation accounts differ in focusing on different gods. One creation myth describes the Ogdoad, the group of eight gods who embodied the primeval waters, and how their meeting resulted in the creation and emergence of the mound.[29] Another myth relates the actions of Atum, said to be the first god to appear on the mound, who gave rise to the Ennead, nine gods representing the natural forces of the world. A third myth says that the god Ptah, who was associated with the mound, created the world simply by envisioning and naming all things in it.[30] To some degree these myths represent competing theologies, but they can also be seen as representing different aspects of the process of creation.[31]

It seems that the universe and the gods are eternal. So in a sense in the Egyptian mythos

A third myth says that the god Ptah, who was associated with the mound, created the world simply by envisioning and naming all things in it.

Gods words created the universe… Wow what an uncanny resemblance to the Abrahamic mythology I wonder if men were made from clay/drit/earth as well in their mythology…

 

[Abbadon]

Perfectly irrelevent.

You are forgetting the original question that I was answering.
Here it is again:

Attemtping to obscure this by introducing other ‘gods’ is a red herring.
The answer given need not address that, it only need address the question that was asked.

Yes but your point of pascals wager is flawed because you attribute consequences to a specific god. That is the flaw.

We could redo the wager with inserting rather than the Judeo-Islamic-Chritian god, Alma… No matter what you can’t escape it you have to attribute consequences to pascals wager is by selecting a specific god. And every belief system has specific consequences.

 

[Abbadon]

I stand corrected, Mary’s assumption is in the Bible ( I just forgot) and her assumption into heaven, is an undeniable and absolute fact.

The Bible, is the inspired word of God, in that, there is absolutely no doubt on heaven or on earth.



I take my leave.

No don’t it’s a trap… You have so much to live for… Just hold on to your sanity damnit just hold on… humanity will get back up soon… you just have to hold on…

 

[Abbadon]

And your proof that this is ‘made up’?

You do realize that positive assertions without the force of some backing erodes credibility…right?

Prove to me the mythology of faeries or Zues is made up then i can use your method to do the same thing. Do you not understand that proof is on those that claim it…

 

[jmcrae]

I stand corrected, Mary’s assumption is in the Bible ( I just forgot)

Revelation 12:1

and her assumption into heaven, is an undeniable and absolute fact.

… given that the Apostle Thomas witnessed it and recorded that he witnessed it; that no trace has ever been found of her body, even though we have the bones of every other woman and man who was associated with Christ during His lifetime - it seems conspicuous that hers alone are missing.

The Bible, is the inspired word of God, in that, there is absolutely no doubt on heaven or on earth.

Thank you for noticing.

I take my leave.

BYE.

 

[adriancombe]

We all know that the RC considers Zygotes human life and therefor, when aborted, they get to go to heaven.

Now, it is estimated that between 20% and 50% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous and natural abortion of the zygote.

In the history of man, that’s hundreds of billions of zygotes that have aborted without mans intervention.

It must be believed that God chose to create life in the form of a zygote, knowing that said life would be aborted spontaneously in a few weeks.

When the zygotes are in heaven, what form do they take? Do they remain zygotes and just float around?

Jer 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.”

 

[vz71]

Prove to me the mythology of faeries or Zues is made up then i can use your method to do the same thing.

Not my responsibility. I didn’t make the assertion.

Do you not understand that proof is on those that claim it…

I understand well, and am pleased you agree.
Now then, as shown by this statement:

Ahhh of course when the church make things up it naturally instantly becomes fact.

You are asserting that the church is making it up. And as you said earlier, “proof is on those that claim it” So prove it.

And also, Mr. Phantasm has also made a few claims, specifically:

They are made up, especially Mary’s assumption. Mary’s assumption is not contained in the Bible, ( the Bible of course, written and made up my man).

And as was said again “proof is on those that claim it” So again, Prove it.

We are all waiting to see. As shown above, you have both made the assertion, now cough up the proof
Will this be some epiphany of wisdom no one has considered before? Or will this be a moment of raucous laughter?

 

[vz71]

phantasm;4943984:

We all know that the RC considers Zygotes human life and therefor, when aborted, they get to go to heaven.

Now, it is estimated that between 20% and 50% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous and natural abortion of the zygote.

In the history of man, that’s hundreds of billions of zygotes that have aborted without mans intervention.

It must be believed that God chose to create life in the form of a zygote, knowing that said life would be aborted spontaneously in a few weeks.

When the zygotes are in heaven, what form do they take? Do they remain zygotes and just float around?

Jer 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.”

God’s love for us is independent of our physical form. Therefore, a human attempting to limit God in this way makes about as much sense as the fish in the bowl thinking its owner isn’t alive because it appears to have no water to breathe.

1 Cor 13:12 “We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know I part; but then I shall know even as I am known.”

Our knowledge is heaven is perfect, just as God knows us perfectly. All knowledge in this life is less than nothing by contrast, as St. Thomas Aquinas rightly noted.
Claiming that a few more or less brain cells in this mortal form makes any difference to the infinite knowledge of eternity is like thinking the fish in the bowl will learn to drive the passing truck that shakes its fishbowl if we just give it a few more fishflakes.

-Adrian

Finally someone is getting back to the original post.
Every human will eventually be in heaven or hell.
Speculating about the development of said humans is just that, speculation.

 

[Abbadon]

Not my responsibility. I didn’t make the assertion.

I understand well, and am pleased you agree.
Now then, as shown by this statement: You are asserting that the church is making it up. And as you said earlier, “proof is on those that claim it” So prove it.

And also, Mr. Phantasm has also made a few claims, specifically: And as was said again “proof is on those that claim it” So again, Prove it.

We are all waiting to see. As shown above, you have both made the assertion, now cough up the proof
Will this be some epiphany of wisdom no one has considered before? Or will this be a moment of raucous laughter?

By calling the bluff all we are saying is that we are skeptical of your claims. The assumption of Mary, The story of Jesus. The existence of your specific god. You make the claims of these things it is up to those that claim it to show evidence of it. And no evidence has ever been demonstrated. If it was I would be an .

Nice try trying to twist the burden of proof though. Eugenie Scott said that scientists are not good at debates like this because scientists are used to dealing with honest people.

 

[Abbadon]

Finally someone is getting back to the original post.
Every human will eventually be in heaven or hell.
Speculating about the development of said humans is just that, speculation.

But does the church not give guidelines to this question? Do we need to be baptized? Must we believe in Jesus and the resurrection? How about sex before marriage? What about denying the holy spirit?

There seems to be a set of rules, rules are hardly speculation. Even if the church officially says that line, they make it seem like they know exactly where souls go, and most of the time it’s to eternal damnation.

I as an atheist and one who sins daily in many ways, the perceived notion I have is that I will be sent to hell if your belief system is correct. However most of my time I am trying not to hurt other sentient beings and when I do I reassess, realize my mistake and change as best I can.

By your claim then that entrance into heaven or hell is just speculation it is entirely possible that anyone can get into heaven. And it is entirely possible that I will (not that I want to live forever).

 

[Abbadon]

Not my responsibility. I didn’t make the assertion.

I understand well, and am pleased you agree.
Now then, as shown by this statement: You are asserting that the church is making it up. And as you said earlier, “proof is on those that claim it” So prove it.

And also, Mr. Phantasm has also made a few claims, specifically: And as was said again “proof is on those that claim it” So again, Prove it.

We are all waiting to see. As shown above, you have both made the assertion, now cough up the proof
Will this be some epiphany of wisdom no one has considered before? Or will this be a moment of raucous laughter?

Or we could try it another way. I believe in the Goddess Hel and I want her to let me touch her inappropriately. Does Hel exist? Do you think she is just a mythological story?

And if you answer No and that the stories are all just made up… Along your lines of reasoning… I would ask you to prove it…

I really hate this dirty tactic turning burden of proof around. As one who has hopes of becoming a research scientist it sickens me even more, it’s just so low and disgusting.

 

[jmcrae]

Or we could try it another way. I believe in the Goddess Hel and I want her to let me touch her inappropriately. Does Hel exist? Do you think she is just a mythological story?

I would never comment on the origins of a story that I don’t even know. Perhaps there is such a being - if so, she is not one that I have ever personally encountered. She also doesn’t seem particularly relevant to my life, so, while academically interesting, I don’t see a real need to focus a lot of energy on learning about her. But, if you have some good stories to tell, then tell on.

If you are planning to be a research scientist, you need to let go of all of your preconceived ideas and assumptions - just because something seems unbelievable to you, does not mean that, therefore, someone just “made it up.” You are going to encounter all kinds of unbelievable things in the course of your scientific career. You are going to make a habit of not assuming you know where things came from, or even that you know what they are, before you have made a thorough study and done up a good report.

 

[Abbadon]

I would never comment on the origins of a story that I don’t even know. Perhaps there is such a being - if so, she is not one that I have ever personally encountered. She also doesn’t seem particularly relevant to my life, so, while academically interesting, I don’t see a real need to focus a lot of energy on learning about her. But, if you have some good stories to tell, then tell on.

If you are planning to be a research scientist, you need to let go of all of your preconceived ideas and assumptions - just because something seems unbelievable to you, does not mean that, therefore, someone just “made it up.” You are going to encounter all kinds of unbelievable things in the course of your scientific career. You are going to make a habit of not assuming you know where things came from, or even that you know what they are, before you have made a thorough study and done up a good report.

Nice way to doge the question. I shall say the same about god and move on…

Science makes me realize just how little I do know. I’m all about the evidence. And religions have non. That is why faith is so paramount to the institution of religion. However being raised catholic I do have alot of baggage that I am just letting go of.

I’m going to attempt going cold turkey on religion again, hopefully this time I can kick the theological debate habit.

 

[jmcrae]

Nice way to doge the question. I shall say the same about god and move on…

Science makes me realize just how little I do know. I’m all about the evidence.

Good!

And religions have none.

When you discount the first-person testimonials, the unexplained healings, the archaeological evidence, and the Scriptures, then yes, you are pretty much left with no evidence.

However, throwing out all of the evidence, and then saying that there is no evidence, does not seem particularly “scientific,” to me.

 

[Wild_Boar]

What is the theological belief by the Roman Catholics on this obviously valid question.

The Bible is silent about what happens to such. So there isn’t much validity to the question. You might as well ponder whether or not Adam had a belly button.

 

[vz71]

Nice try trying to twist the burden of proof though. Eugenie Scott said that scientists are not good at debates like this because scientists are used to dealing with honest people.

I thought that by providing the actual quotes that were used by the individuals making the claims, I would be clearly establishing who made the claims, and who has the burden to prove such claims. That is what was implied in an earlier post…“proof is on those that claim it”
Here are the claims as made in the words of the individuals claiming them:

Ahhh of course when the church make things up it naturally instantly becomes fact.

They are made up, especially Mary’s assumption. Mary’s assumption is not contained in the Bible, ( the Bible of course, written and made up my man).

This is no dodge, this is not twist.
This is the burden of proof being placed squarely upon the the shoulders of those that made the claims.
I thought I was dealing with individuals with the honesty to back their own claims.
Am I? Or am I dealing with individuals that scream out accusations and then duck and hide rather then take responsibility for their words.
The board is still wide open…will these individuals respond and provide the proof to back their claims?