Zygotes and heaven?

  • Thread starter Thread starter phantasm
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
RobbyS said:
Now you are playing with words. Insanity is indeed based on a judgement, but judgments don’t vary that much.
Click to expand...
Like I said I do not really understand what it means to be sane. But an example of what I mean is best portrayed by the dark humor comedy series Dead Like Me. In which a boy that is diagnosed with schizophrenia because he sees gravelings, now in this story gravelings are real, but no one else sees them except for reapers and this “schizophrenic”.

But in a world where adults believe in hell and the devil “to quote the comic proof #17”, I just don’t think the words insane mean anything. Perhaps some are physically (brain chemistry) deluded and others are elective deluded. I do not consider religious people sane. They believe some very insane things.
 
RobbyS said:
Supernatural doesn’t necessary mean incorporal. The doctrine of the Resurrection of the dead is fundamental to Christianity and it implies a “natural” unity of body and soul. Itis the “man” not just the soul that is immortal. Thus death is “unnatural.”
Click to expand...
Seriously magic magic and more magic. Reading Harry Potter may be entertaining but to believe that it is real… Not that there is anything wrong with that…
 
Abbadon said:
Like I said I do not really understand what it means to be sane. But an example of what I mean is best portrayed by the dark humor comedy series Dead Like Me. In which a boy that is diagnosed with schizophrenia because he sees gravelings, now in this story gravelings are real, but no one else sees them except for reapers and this “schizophrenic”.

But in a world where adults believe in hell and the devil “to quote the comic proof #17”, I just don’t think the words insane mean anything. Perhaps some are physically (brain chemistry) deluded and others are elective deluded. I do not consider religious people sane. They believe some very insane things.
Click to expand...
If you went back in time to the 7th Century and told about men flying, they would judge you insane because everyone knew that men could not fly. You judge us insane because we believe in the Resurrection. But this is simply because I choose to believe the New Testament witnesses. But any singular event is hard to “prove.” And you will note that by “the Resurrection” we are talking about an event that is as unique as the moment of Creation. Indeed, what I find most credible about the Gospel stories is how confused the witnesses were. The story of Doubting Thomas is proof of one thing: the man writing the story knew how implausible it was.
 
RobbyS said:
If you went back in time to the 7th Century and told about men flying, they would judge you insane because everyone knew that men could not fly. You judge us insane because we believe in the Resurrection. But this is simply because I choose to believe the New Testament witnesses. But any singular event is hard to “prove.” And you will note that by “the Resurrection” we are talking about an event that is as unique as the moment of Creation. Indeed, what I find most credible about the Gospel stories is how confused the witnesses were. The story of Doubting Thomas is proof of one thing: the man writing the story knew how implausible it was.
Click to expand...
If you heard the same story today you would not believe it. You also I assume do not believe in all the magical things that Mohammad or Buddha claimed to do. Why is this story so different and why do you believe this one? Because the authors wrote about the implausibility of it it makes it more reliable?
 
Abbadon said:
I’m pretty sure Odin created worlds to. And also the Titans and there is that father sky and mother earth in Egyptian mythology… And the rainbow serpent in aboriginal lore…
Click to expand...
But they did not create the Universe. This is a Christian concept, creation from nothing. Understanding that “nothing” means"nothing". The gods are simply elements of the universe, more like our concept of Angel.
 
RobbyS said:
But they did not create the Universe. This is a Christian concept, creation from nothing. Understanding that “nothing” means"nothing". The gods are simply elements of the universe, more like our concept of Angel.
Click to expand...
The rainbow serpent, Odin and the two Egyptian god and goddess created all the known earth and the stars. In aboriginal folklore i think some other biengs were responsible for the heavens… Either way why does it matter if it was a team effort? In thier stories something created it all
 
Abbadon said:
If you heard the same story today you would not believe it. You also I assume do not believe in all the magical things that Mohammad or Buddha claimed to do. Why is this story so different and why do you believe this one? Because the authors wrote about the implausibility of it it makes it more reliable?
Click to expand...
Mohammed did nothing miraculous. He simply had a vision, which is why you infidels frind his religion less offensive than Christianity. Likewise the Buddha, at least in one form of it, which is a kind of atheism. Indeed, the story of the Resurrection of Christ is improbable. So, to many people, is the notion of Creation, the notion of a beginning of time, at least as a scientifically knowable event. The old Greek notion of a world without beginning was more congenial to scientists. IAC. I am able to believe it because 1) I was tolf th story at a very young age and 2) the story explains things about men that no other does. and 3) the story has verisimitude because it does not read like a theory. No attempt is made to explain the event. Take Christianity as a working hypothesis based on a mysterious occurance.
 
RobbyS said:
Mohammed did nothing miraculous. He simply had a vision, which is why you infidels frind his religion less offensive than Christianity. Likewise the Buddha, at least in one form of it, which is a kind of atheism. Indeed, the story of the Resurrection of Christ is improbable. So, to many people, is the notion of Creation, the notion of a beginning of time, at least as a scientifically knowable event. The old Greek notion of a world without beginning was more congenial to scientists. IAC. I am able to believe it because 1) I was tolf th story at a very young age and 2) the story explains things about men that no other does. and 3) the story has verisimitude because it does not read like a theory. No attempt is made to explain the event. Take Christianity as a working hypothesis based on a mysterious occurance.
Click to expand...
I find Mohammed the most offensive. Disgusting war mongering, lying, pedophile… I like Christianity relative to Islam, my moms catholic and shes really nice even if she’s deluded…
Actually he flew to heaven on a winged horse and he also had visions from the angel Gabriel I think your right though… I don’t know of much else. Buddha was claimed to all this magical bs, my dads Buddhist so I have to put up with it when I go to temple invisibility, flight, stopping things with his mind… He is only succeeded in power by the Avatar (that is a joke in reference to Avatar: The Last Air Bender).

what does it explain about men? 3 examples will suffice.
A story that reads like a story makes it more credible?
It makes no attempt to explain the even but is a hypothesis? Do you know what a hypothesis is?
 
Abbadon said:
If I believe I am Napolean people will call me crazy, but if 1.5 billion people believe I am Napolean…
Click to expand...
This question was addressed well by Frank Sheed in his book ‘Theology and Sanity’

Sanity has to do with the acceptance or denial of reality and a knowledge of the reality.
 
vz71 said:
Irrelevant.
You have already chosen atheism.
Click to expand...
Relevant, none of the Gods listed can be proven to exist and all are / or were worshiped by man.

It is an interesting commentary, that you view choosing a religion or unbelief, like how a person chooses buying a pair of shoes at Target.
 
vz71 said:
Of course, for that posit, proof is required.
Find it. Post it. Prove it.
Click to expand...
Not one Catholic supernatural belief can be proven true.

You should have posted, find it, post it, believe it on faith.
 
vz71 said:
This question was addressed well by Frank Sheed in his book ‘Theology and Sanity’

Sanity has to do with the acceptance or denial of reality and a knowledge of the reality.
Click to expand...
Not to sure when he wrote that book, but his overly simple analogy does not take into account delusions and those who are utterly incapable of distinguishing between reality and a delusion.

Many who have lost touch with reality and have crossed over the boundaries towards insanity, have literally no ability to deny or accept reality, as they haven’t the reasoning skills due to their illness.

I’m just a layman, and I can see that this Sheed’s analogy is laughably simple.
 
Abbadon said:
I’m pretty sure Odin created worlds to. And also the Titans and there is that father sky and mother earth in Egyptian mythology… And the rainbow serpent in aboriginal lore…
Click to expand...
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.
 
A zygote is usually produced by a fertilization event between two haploid cells an ovum from a female and a sperm from a male- which forms the single diploid cell. Thus, the zygote contains DNA originating from BOTH mother and father and this provides all the genetic information necessary to form a new individual.
These terms are mans words for the beginning of life. But I do find it interesting that even though these terms describe beginning of life, how many people dismiss the zygote as being life. It is convienient when they want to abort that life to give it a name of a mass of cells seemingly to convince themselves that they are not destroying life.
I would suggest, though I am surely not an expert on God, that God, has been taking care of the universe for a very long time and it is in Gods hands and is well taken care of. Remember as well, to those that think that very few even make it to heaven, Jesus stated “In my Fathers’ house are many mansions”. I would suggest, that we never underestimate the omipotence of our God.
 
phantasm said:
Relevant, none of the Gods listed can be proven to exist and all are / or were worshiped by man.
Click to expand...
Perfectly irrelevent.

You are forgetting the original question that I was answering.
Here it is again:
Abbadon said:
Why is it so acceptable for you to do the same about your fantasies (god) and not me for mine?
Click to expand...
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.
 
phantasm said:
Not one Catholic supernatural belief can be proven true.
You should have posted, find it, post it, believe it on faith.
Click to expand...
There was a positive assertion made that the beliefs of the Church are simply made up.
Abbadon said:
Ahhh of course when the church make things up it naturally instantly becomes fact. Because they are infallible…
Click to expand...
With that positive assertion comes the burden of proving it.

So my statement still stands, find the proof…post it.
 
phantasm said:
Not to sure when he wrote that book, but his overly simple analogy does not take into account delusions and those who are utterly incapable of distinguishing between reality and a delusion.

Many who have lost touch with reality and have crossed over the boundaries towards insanity, have literally no ability to deny or accept reality, as they haven’t the reasoning skills due to their illness.

I’m just a layman, and I can see that this Sheed’s analogy is laughably simple.
Click to expand...
So what part of the book do you find this in?
Can you quote it for us? Perhaps provide a page number?
Anything at all that would show us you have read more then the back cover?

I would hate to think you are making these grand conclusions without having read the evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top