Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Tired of wandering the lawless wilds of the AC&A forum? Have a friendly chat in our cozy, velvet-covered civility lounge. Alcohol not permitted, only the Kenny G button works on the jukebox. All undesirable types will be quietly escorted out the back door.

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby mitchellmckain » Thu Mar 05, 2015 12:38 am

spongebob wrote:
Aaron wrote:I don't think it is problematic for Christians who believe God is more than capable of providing for the people he already knows are his. So a worry about there being too many people is not one that I think most Christians would share.


That's amazing. How would you imagine god solving this problem? Suppose that 20 billion people were all resurrected (and that's just a wild guess), physically and wholly. You really don't see a space problem if they are all living here on the earth? Sure, you could always say god will just increase the size of the earth or ship some off to different planets, but that's all just wild speculation.

I am with spongebob on this one. This is like the attitude of the Israelites before the Babylonian Captivity. They also thought God wouldn't let anything bad happen to them. They were wrong. This universe operates according to a set of laws for a reason. The earth will probably be fine. But if humans don't stop behaving like a disease then the earth will shrug us off like the parasites we have become and the universe will belong to those who demonstrate the capacity to learn from their mistakes so to be in harmony with nature.


spongebob wrote:
But anyway my view is that we will be given a new body that is imperishable and we will be able to eat and drink like Jesus did while he was on earth after his resurrection. But I see the resurrection as more of a new body, a transformation into something new and better, and not a reanimation of molecules like a zombie or something like that. I would make an analogy to the Jewish Temple, as we learn from the Bible the Temple of the Jews was only a copy of a thing in Heaven, so that the Heavenly thing is everything the earthly thing is except it is not the same and is much better in every way.

So this description makes me wonder if this is a sterile body (meaning no reproduction) and it still doesn't answer the over population issue. This also makes me wonder how in the world you could exist indefinitely without going insane. I wonder if Christians actually think about this; I know did when I was a Christian. I couldn't imagine continued existence for thousands, maybe millions of years, whether I had a body or not.

I quite agree. Eternal existence by itself is Hell.

What is missing is life. You see life has a very interesting characteristic. It give things the ability to become more than they are. Like the mathematical operation of addition the implication is an endless process without limit. Life is growth, challenge, learning, wonder, passion, creativity, excitement, and love. With life there is no end to we can become, to what we can find and what we can create.

In this universe we take the things we are given and we learn to recombine them in new ways to find new challenges and learning and creative endeavors. Even in this universe it is difficult to see the end of the possibilities. People of one age cannot even imagine the things discovered and created in a later age. It would truly blow their mind.

However, I think the universe is ultimately finite. But I believe it was created by someone who is not finite. In God I see infinite capacity to create new challenges and experiences. Thus in a relationship with Him I see no end to what He can give and what He can teach. That is eternal life - unlimited growth, infinite excitement , never-ending creativity, unlimited love, infinite wonder, more challenges without end, forever passion, learning that never ceases and a service that will always prove worthwhile.
Out of Skull for the Stars My first book is now available on Amazon.com
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 10316
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 1:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Simplyme » Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:23 am

This also makes me wonder how in the world you could exit indefinitely without going insane. I wonder if Christians actually think about this; I know did when I was a Christian. I couldn't imagine continued existence for thousands, maybe millions of years, whether I had a body or not.


I would be more then happy to put this to the test(being scared of death and all).............. :D
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Fri Mar 06, 2015 2:04 pm

Simplyme wrote:
This also makes me wonder how in the world you could exit indefinitely without going insane. I wonder if Christians actually think about this; I know did when I was a Christian. I couldn't imagine continued existence for thousands, maybe millions of years, whether I had a body or not.


I would be more then happy to put this to the test(being scared of death and all).............. :D


I think you should really dig into why that is so, if you really feel that way. There really is no reason to fear not being alive. I'm not too comfortable with the process of dying myself, mainly because it can be so painful, both physically and emotionally, and it can sometimes be so prolonged. It can be a horrible situation. But being dead is no different than being not born. You don't have any experiences from the year 1685, right? So in the year 2985, you'll be just the same. Now I can certainly understand the desire to extend life. We get quite used to living and being with our loved ones, but then you have to factor in your health and don't forget about work. If I knew I had to continue working for the next 100 years, I think I'd be looking for a different occupation. So for me the practical desire ends up hoping that we can push human lifespans to something around 150 years, roughly twice our current limit, but only if we can have a youthful body. I don't want to live for 60 years in a little room eating jello and playing scrabble. Of course as soon as that is realized, people will be hoping for 300 years and so on, so it's never ending cycle. So it's probably best just to dismiss those kind of dreams and make the best of what we do have.

And really, when you think about it, what do most of us do with our time anyway? We spend a small portion of our time doing really important things, but not much. We waste a lot of it watching stupid TV shows, arguing, working at jobs we hate, going to pointless meetings, standing in line. And that gets me back to the idea of eternal living. What the heck would we do with all that time? My Christian teaching suggested that we would spend all of our time praising god, but to me that just sounds boring. I think if I had no limit to life and nothing could hurt me, I would probably become reckless. I've considered doing a lot of stupid things in my life, but decided otherwise because I was sure it would either get me injured or put in jail.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Simplyme » Fri Mar 06, 2015 3:29 pm

spongebob wrote:
Simplyme wrote:
This also makes me wonder how in the world you could exit indefinitely without going insane. I wonder if Christians actually think about this; I know did when I was a Christian. I couldn't imagine continued existence for thousands, maybe millions of years, whether I had a body or not.


I would be more then happy to put this to the test(being scared of death and all).............. :D


I think you should really dig into why that is so, if you really feel that way. There really is no reason to fear not being alive. I'm not too comfortable with the process of dying myself, mainly because it can be so painful, both physically and emotionally, and it can sometimes be so prolonged. It can be a horrible situation. But being dead is no different than being not born. You don't have any experiences from the year 1685, right? So in the year 2985, you'll be just the same. Now I can certainly understand the desire to extend life. We get quite used to living and being with our loved ones, but then you have to factor in your health and don't forget about work. If I knew I had to continue working for the next 100 years, I think I'd be looking for a different occupation. So for me the practical desire ends up hoping that we can push human lifespans to something around 150 years, roughly twice our current limit, but only if we can have a youthful body. I don't want to live for 60 years in a little room eating jello and playing scrabble. Of course as soon as that is realized, people will be hoping for 300 years and so on, so it's never ending cycle. So it's probably best just to dismiss those kind of dreams and make the best of what we do have.

And really, when you think about it, what do most of us do with our time anyway? We spend a small portion of our time doing really important things, but not much. We waste a lot of it watching stupid TV shows, arguing, working at jobs we hate, going to pointless meetings, standing in line. And that gets me back to the idea of eternal living. What the heck would we do with all that time? My Christian teaching suggested that we would spend all of our time praising god, but to me that just sounds boring. I think if I had no limit to life and nothing could hurt me, I would probably become reckless. I've considered doing a lot of stupid things in my life, but decided otherwise because I was sure it would either get me injured or put in jail.



Thanks for your concern(truly).

I have thought about looking into it more. It get to the point sometimes, that I think of it so much I get depressed(and if you know me, I'm a happy go lucky guy). So just imagine how much better it is for me now, to not to have to think that I could burn for all eternity, if I made a mistake! It's 50% better now, but death still scares the shit out of me.

I honestly think if I visit a shrink, with what I tell him goes through my mind, he would be able to write a book. :-)
I find it rather amusing, when thought of as ignorant or stupid(though I can be on many subjects). Especially by those who believe in a deity up in heaven watching our every move, and rewarding or punishing us after we have expired.
Simplyme
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5953
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:11 am

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Fri Mar 06, 2015 3:59 pm

Simplyme wrote:Thanks for your concern(truly).

I have thought about looking into it more. It get to the point sometimes, that I think of it so much I get depressed(and if you know me, I'm a happy go lucky guy). So just imagine how much better it is for me now, to not to have to think that I could burn for all eternity, if I made a mistake! It's 50% better now, but death still scares the shit out of me.

I honestly think if I visit a shrink, with what I tell him goes through my mind, he would be able to write a book. :-)


You sound like George Costanza. :lol: Maybe you have a future in comedy. Don't let that neurosis go to waste.

But to be more serious about this topic, I think it's just amazing how we handle death as a specie. I saw that film "Unbroken" last week. Spoiler Alert:

While they were in the raft they struggled to live every day. When one of them got very ill, they comforted him while he worried about dying. Then when he died, they just pushed him into the water and not long after that it was all about them surviving. His life was over; no more struggle. Life just goes on.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Aaron » Fri Mar 06, 2015 8:27 pm

spongebob wrote:That's amazing. How would you imagine god solving this problem? Suppose that 20 billion people were all resurrected (and that's just a wild guess), physically and wholly. You really don't see a space problem if they are all living here on the earth? Sure, you could always say god will just increase the size of the earth or ship some off to different planets, but that's all just wild speculation.

I guess I just don't see how it's even something to worry about seeings how I believe God is the one who brought the whole universe into existence in the first place. The whole not having space and running out of food dilemma just doesn't even seem like a big deal when I look at what God is able to do. But I suppose that's just how I see it.

Spongebob wrote:I find that explanation both perplexing and somewhat horrific and I can't imagine how this fits any description of "resurrection". But I can absolutely assure you that your physical body contains atoms that once belonged to another person, and not necessarily from someone who lived long ago. We regularly ingest molecules from other people (and other creatures) whether we want to or not, unless you live in isolation that is.

I didn't follow exactly what part you found horrific?

Spongebob wrote:So this description makes me wonder if this is a sterile body (meaning no reproduction) and it still doesn't answer the over population issue. This also makes me wonder how in the world you could exit indefinitely without going insane. I wonder if Christians actually think about this; I know did when I was a Christian. I couldn't imagine continued existence for thousands, maybe millions of years, whether I had a body or not.

I believe we won't reproduce anymore like we do now and as for the over population issue I still don't see it as a big issue at all, if that's a problem for God then he isn't the same God I believe in and read about in the Bible. And as to the eternal existence and the insane part, well I actually do see that as a HUGE issue myself, in fact a few time I have referred to it on here as the entropy of the heart and it is my belief that if we were to live forever in our current state (in sin) it would be horrible and miserable and basically everything life is not supposed to be. But I believe that that is exactly the problem God solves with Jesus and the new life, I believe that is in part why he gives us a new life so that we can live forever and have it actually be a very good excellent eternal life and in fact I believe life in Jesus is the only way eternal life in this sense would even be possible.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" - C.S. Lewis
User avatar
Aaron
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Alaska
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Fri Mar 06, 2015 8:36 pm

Aaron wrote:I guess I just don't see how it's even something to worry about seeings how I believe God is the one who brought the whole universe into existence in the first place. The whole not having space and running out of food dilemma just doesn't even seem like a big deal when I look at what God is able to do. But I suppose that's just how I see it.


The only way I can see this making sense is through magic.

I didn't follow exactly what part you found horrific?


The part about people not having parts of their bodies.

I believe we won't reproduce anymore like we do now and as for the over population issue I still don't see it as a big issue at all, if that's a problem for God then he isn't the same God I believe in and read about in the Bible.


But it's a matter of basic logistics. Even if everyone gets along swimmingly, the idea of stacking tens of billions of people onto the same planet is problematic. At some point there won't even be a place to stand.

And as to the eternal existence and the insane part, well I actually do see that as a HUGE issue myself, in fact a few time I have referred to it on here as the entropy of the heart and it is my belief that if we were to live forever in our current state (in sin) it would be horrible and miserable and basically everything life is not supposed to be. But I believe that that is exactly the problem God solves with Jesus and the new life, I believe that is in part why he gives us a new life so that we can live forever and have it actually be a very good excellent eternal life and in fact I believe life in Jesus is the only way eternal life in this sense would even be possible.


But all you really said was that you believe it will be swell. How? If we are the same people, then why would anything about your nature be different? If you are somehow changed by the process of resurrection into a being who isn't bothered by long boring stretches of nothing, then you won't be the same person. That is what sounds horrible to me.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Aaron » Fri Mar 06, 2015 11:19 pm

spongebob wrote:The only way I can see this making sense is through magic.

Huh, I dunno, to me that would be almost saying God was such a terrible designer or planner of a world for his children to live in that he had to do some hodgepodge magic to keep it all from flying apart at the seams. I don't believe in a God with such little foresight and such little wisdom. I think he will do exactly what he intends and it will work out just the way he wanted it to and it will be good.

    "Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also."

For me it comes down to whether or not I trust Jesus to mean what he said.

spongebob wrote:The part about people not having parts of their bodies.

Oh yes, it would be awful, but that was just a problem I thought of about people being reanimated physically, but mostly it was meant to strengthen my argument for the continuity of information that is really the thing that matters and not this idea that the molecules you die with are the ones that you're going to have for all of eternity.

spongebob wrote:But it's a matter of basic logistics. Even if everyone gets along swimmingly, the idea of stacking tens of billions of people onto the same planet is problematic. At some point there won't even be a place to stand.

But like I said I just don't see how God could have such little foresight as that. I choose to believe he's a much better father, king, creator, friend and savior than that, perfect in fact.

spongebob wrote:But all you really said was that you believe it will be swell. How? If we are the same people, then why would anything about your nature be different? If you are somehow changed by the process of resurrection into a being who isn't bothered by long boring stretches of nothing, then you won't be the same person. That is what sounds horrible to me.

Well I don't think we will be the same people, I think we are being transformed and called to something which is much better, but us changing is not something unique to heaven, we change here on earth too, and it is not a bad thing and in a way it does mean we aren't who we were the year before, but in another it does mean we are still us and probably it means we are glad to be who we are now, glad for the changes, and look forward to keep getting better tomorrow.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" - C.S. Lewis
User avatar
Aaron
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Alaska
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Sat Mar 07, 2015 6:51 am

Aaron wrote:Huh, I dunno, to me that would be almost saying God was such a terrible designer or planner of a world for his children to live in that he had to do some hodgepodge magic to keep it all from flying apart at the seams. I don't believe in a God with such little foresight and such little wisdom. I think he will do exactly what he intends and it will work out just the way he wanted it to and it will be good.

    "Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also."

For me it comes down to whether or not I trust Jesus to mean what he said.


You have to understand that to me, the entire scope of Jesus is the same as magic, at least in the sense that Christianity was presented to me and the way I understand everyone around me practicing it.

But like I said I just don't see how God could have such little foresight as that. I choose to believe he's a much better father, king, creator, friend and savior than that, perfect in fact.


As I said, magic.

Well I don't think we will be the same people, I think we are being transformed and called to something which is much better, but us changing is not something unique to heaven, we change here on earth too, and it is not a bad thing and in a way it does mean we aren't who we were the year before, but in another it does mean we are still us and probably it means we are glad to be who we are now, glad for the changes, and look forward to keep getting better tomorrow.


See, that's a serious problem with the theology. If these changes are so dramatic, as you suggest, then what you are describing is not people at all but automatons who don't have the will to choose reckless behavior. It's a paradoxical argument that tries to straddle the fence and I just don't see how it works logically. You can't say that you will be so transformed that you could never do something bad but that you still have the choice and will to make your own choices.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Aaron » Sat Mar 07, 2015 2:45 pm

spongebob wrote:You have to understand that to me, the entire scope of Jesus is the same as magic, at least in the sense that Christianity was presented to me and the way I understand everyone around me practicing it.

Well okay let me try. Would you consider God being completely self existent, a thing which doesn't depend on anything else to exist, as magical? That seems like the most basic place we could start and if you don't think that is magical then I suppose we could move on, but if you think that is magical then we'll have to try and see what could be non-magical then. What do you think?

spongebob wrote:See, that's a serious problem with the theology. If these changes are so dramatic, as you suggest, then what you are describing is not people at all but automatons who don't have the will to choose reckless behavior. It's a paradoxical argument that tries to straddle the fence and I just don't see how it works logically. You can't say that you will be so transformed that you could never do something bad but that you still have the choice and will to make your own choices.

You mean they will be automatons because they will not do anything wrong any more? I would say that before Jesus gives us new life lasting for eternity we had no hope of anything but continuing on with out bad habits, we were destined for self destruction on the eternal time scale. So I would say we were actually slaves in a sort of way to our own bad habits, in a way now we have been set free, God gives us a choice now, we can choose to have life with him or we can continue to our own destruction. To choose to do something bad is to forsake that freedom and to return to enslavement to self destructive behavior. At least that is the way I look at it and I think you would find the same thing in the Bible. I think maybe that was Jesus' point when he said a man cannot serve two masters, we can't ride the fence and as you've put it and choose to do both bad and good things and think that that sort of life is true freedom, I don't think that is right and Jesus I think would say that is not even a possibility. You can only serve one master, and Jesus is saying follow me, you will find life.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" - C.S. Lewis
User avatar
Aaron
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Alaska
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Sun Mar 08, 2015 6:08 am

Aaron wrote:Well okay let me try. Would you consider God being completely self existent, a thing which doesn't depend on anything else to exist, as magical? That seems like the most basic place we could start and if you don't think that is magical then I suppose we could move on, but if you think that is magical then we'll have to try and see what could be non-magical then. What do you think?


I would say not necessarily, but it would depend on the description. As of now, all descriptions of god are purely speculative so there's nothing definitive to rest your case on. But if you want to tie me down to the typical idea of "god" that Christians I know believe in, then yes I find that to be complete fantasy or magic. It's been my experience that it's much easier to discuss this idea from a bottom down approach rather than top down. For instance, if I pray that my friend's cancer will be cured, that's invoking magic in my opinion.

You mean they will be automatons because they will not do anything wrong any more? I would say that before Jesus gives us new life lasting for eternity we had no hope of anything but continuing on with out bad habits, we were destined for self destruction on the eternal time scale. So I would say we were actually slaves in a sort of way to our own bad habits, in a way now we have been set free, God gives us a choice now, we can choose to have life with him or we can continue to our own destruction. To choose to do something bad is to forsake that freedom and to return to enslavement to self destructive behavior. At least that is the way I look at it and I think you would find the same thing in the Bible. I think maybe that was Jesus' point when he said a man cannot serve two masters, we can't ride the fence and as you've put it and choose to do both bad and good things and think that that sort of life is true freedom, I don't think that is right and Jesus I think would say that is not even a possibility. You can only serve one master, and Jesus is saying follow me, you will find life.


Following your thought process here, whomever you are now, good and bad things, is who you are. If a wise leader offered to remove from you all the desires to do "bad" things, that would change who you are. So if you decided to go live with this person in a community with others who made the same decision and the moment you walked through the gates you would instantly be relieved from all desires of a "bad" nature, and you would only desire to worship this guy and be nice to others, never even contemplating leaving or rebelling, then that fits my description of an automaton. Yes, you freely chose to enter, but after that virtually all your decisions are made for you and you've given away or lost a significant part of who you are. These actually exist on earth and we call them cults and most people are very wary of them for exactly the reasons I reject this whole idea. Of course we know that a cult can't actually strip you of your desire to do things they don't want you to do; but they can do a pretty impressive job of getting people to oppress those desires for a while.

I think saying we are slaves to our bad habits is an overstatement. I would agree that people have tendencies which are cooperative and altruistic and we have tendencies that are selfish, but here's the thing. Even those selfish tendencies are valuable. Do you think Apple Computers would exist if Steve Jobs wasn't a selfish asshole? I don't. We talk a lot about people's talent and intelligence, but when you see people who are at the apex of their field, a major component of what drove them there is often a darker component of their personality. This can be especially true of art. Some of the best music and art and literature comes from dark experiences or thoughts. Now I'm not condoning destructive behaviors; they can certainly be a problem for us if taken beyond their limits, but this idea that the "darker" side of human existence should be eradicated so we can enjoy a peaceful existence to me just sounds comical. It would be like removing a couple of dimensions from existence, like taking a group of real people and transforming them into a two-dimensional story in a graphic novel.

When Christians talk this way it always makes me wonder what they believe god's intention was in the first place. Were Adam and Eve supposed to reject the serpent and thus eliminate original sin? Would this have meant that humans might still have populated the earth but there would be no violence or war or hatred? I think it's a fantasy and I believe it's obvious that the story of Adam and Eve is a metaphor for humans selfish behavior. I think it could possibly be the first literature written from the perspective of dark human tendencies.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Aaron » Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:48 am

spongebob wrote:I would say not necessarily, but it would depend on the description. As of now, all descriptions of god are purely speculative so there's nothing definitive to rest your case on. But if you want to tie me down to the typical idea of "god" that Christians I know believe in, then yes I find that to be complete fantasy or magic. It's been my experience that it's much easier to discuss this idea from a bottom down approach rather than top down. For instance, if I pray that my friend's cancer will be cured, that's invoking magic in my opinion.

So you're saying it makes more sense to talk about magic by looking at how an individual sees their faith interacting with life (like prayer as you said) rather than trying to put context around magic with the basic ideas or concepts of faith? I think that makes sense, at that point there is so many variables it just becomes so hard to know what's going on or what anyone is expecting to have happen, so I would have a hard time even knowing where to start, but I'm open to a suggestion of how we might create a test which would allow us to definitively say "that involves magic". Although for my mind I do see how I would prefer to approach feeling out the concept of magic by pulling as much out as possible and then seeing if at the most basic level if there is magic there and if there isn't then adding in components until we can identify the point where magic comes into play.

spongebob wrote:Following your thought process here, whomever you are now, good and bad things, is who you are. If a wise leader offered to remove from you all the desires to do "bad" things, that would change who you are. So if you decided to go live with this person in a community with others who made the same decision and the moment you walked through the gates you would instantly be relieved from all desires of a "bad" nature, and you would only desire to worship this guy and be nice to others, never even contemplating leaving or rebelling, then that fits my description of an automaton. Yes, you freely chose to enter, but after that virtually all your decisions are made for you and you've given away or lost a significant part of who you are. These actually exist on earth and we call them cults and most people are very wary of them for exactly the reasons I reject this whole idea. Of course we know that a cult can't actually strip you of your desire to do things they don't want you to do; but they can do a pretty impressive job of getting people to oppress those desires for a while.

I think I understand why you see it the way you do. If freedom or freewill is defined or categorized by the number of possible choices that you could make you're saying that in order to maximize freewill we need to be able to choose as many possibilities as possible and therefore bad choices must be left on the table. I actually do think this is how life really works and I do think this is the way God intended it to be, otherwise as you say we would effectively be automatons (I normally use the word robot). I would see the bad choices more though perhaps like a drug addiction, the bad choices are only going to lead to less freewill and less life, said another way the bad choices are anti-freewill and anti-life. From my view it is not that a person who only desires to do good cannot possibly choose to make the bad choice, but they don't want to, they love what is good, they love doing good, they love what is right and are simply not going to choose to do wrong and thus they enjoy more and more life and their freewill is protected and nourished. Unfortunately as Christianity teaches humans are more like a drug addict who can't seem to stop doing bad or get rid of his desire to do bad, even though he might even realize that what he is doing is destructive, but that is what Jesus offers, a way to freedom, to life, to righteousness.

Spongebob wrote:I think saying we are slaves to our bad habits is an overstatement. I would agree that people have tendencies which are cooperative and altruistic and we have tendencies that are selfish, but here's the thing. Even those selfish tendencies are valuable. Do you think Apple Computers would exist if Steve Jobs wasn't a selfish asshole? I don't. We talk a lot about people's talent and intelligence, but when you see people who are at the apex of their field, a major component of what drove them there is often a darker component of their personality. This can be especially true of art. Some of the best music and art and literature comes from dark experiences or thoughts. Now I'm not condoning destructive behaviors; they can certainly be a problem for us if taken beyond their limits, but this idea that the "darker" side of human existence should be eradicated so we can enjoy a peaceful existence to me just sounds comical. It would be like removing a couple of dimensions from existence, like taking a group of real people and transforming them into a two-dimensional story in a graphic novel.

I think we might disagree on the overstatement part. I do see bad choices as being destructive and anti-life and so for me it is anything but an overstatement, but I suspect we will simply disagree there. But why should we think that our measure of whether some bad quality or action is allowable or acceptable should be the end result? Should a corporation which makes a lot of profit and has a huge influence on the world be given a pass on doing bad things as long as they continue to make a lot of profit and have a huge influence? Are you saying that doing bad things is necessary for good things to happen, a necessary evil as some have put it?

Spongebob wrote:When Christians talk this way it always makes me wonder what they believe god's intention was in the first place. Were Adam and Eve supposed to reject the serpent and thus eliminate original sin? Would this have meant that humans might still have populated the earth but there would be no violence or war or hatred? I think it's a fantasy and I believe it's obvious that the story of Adam and Eve is a metaphor for humans selfish behavior. I think it could possibly be the first literature written from the perspective of dark human tendencies.

I think that was God's will for them, that they would obey his instructions, which is why I think he gave them the instructions in the first place. But as you've pointed out at the start and as you've heard many times before, the opportunity was presented to them to choose whether they would obey or not, and in that way they were not automatons.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" - C.S. Lewis
User avatar
Aaron
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Alaska
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby gcescobar10 » Mon Mar 09, 2015 7:03 pm

The Bible describes the resurection in a way that I think points to physical. However, this quesiton bothered me:
"How can something from the physical world (Jesus' body) ascend into the Spiritual world (Heaven)?

Answer: The Resurection (I believe) was indeed physical, and this is possible because Jesus (I believe) is GOD! He can do whatever he wants!

This physical to spiritual thing is mind blowing and impossible to understand. However, I think that God is all knowing, and easily understands things that go way over our head, much like Steven Hawking understands things that a six year old couldn't even fathom. And just think: Steven Hawking is a man, and God is GOD. Just imagine how much smarter He is and how much more He understands!

The Bible described the resurection as physical, so I believe it. Do I understand it? No. But God does.

Hope this helped. Comment if I made any mistakes.
gcescobar10
new recruit
new recruit
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2015 6:25 pm

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby Aaron » Mon Mar 09, 2015 7:16 pm

gcescobar10 wrote:Answer: The Resurection (I believe) was indeed physical, and this is possible because Jesus (I believe) is GOD! He can do whatever he wants!

Hi gcescobar,

I know that your answer will not be acceptable to not a few number of people here, but I think I understand where you're coming from, and I think it's a good one.
"I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" - C.S. Lewis
User avatar
Aaron
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 3073
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:29 pm
Location: Alaska
Affiliation: Christian

Re: Resurrection - physical, spiritual, both or neither?

Postby spongebob » Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:07 pm

Aaron wrote:I think I understand why you see it the way you do. If freedom or freewill is defined or categorized by the number of possible choices that you could make you're saying that in order to maximize freewill we need to be able to choose as many possibilities as possible and therefore bad choices must be left on the table. I actually do think this is how life really works and I do think this is the way God intended it to be, otherwise as you say we would effectively be automatons (I normally use the word robot).


If you don't have the choice to do destructive things, then there's no freewill at all.

I would see the bad choices more though perhaps like a drug addiction, the bad choices are only going to lead to less freewill and less life, said another way the bad choices are anti-freewill and anti-life. From my view it is not that a person who only desires to do good cannot possibly choose to make the bad choice, but they don't want to, they love what is good, they love doing good, they love what is right and are simply not going to choose to do wrong and thus they enjoy more and more life and their freewill is protected and nourished. Unfortunately as Christianity teaches humans are more like a drug addict who can't seem to stop doing bad or get rid of his desire to do bad, even though he might even realize that what he is doing is destructive, but that is what Jesus offers, a way to freedom, to life, to righteousness.


You are right in part of this, but I just think this dream of someone lifting you out of your own personality is a fantasy. Despite extreme devotion, many, many Christians still find it difficult to avoid stepping over the line. Why this would be any different after death is not clear to me; if Jesus could really work magic and remove all desire to do bad things after death then I don't see why it wouldn't work before death as well.

I think we might disagree on the overstatement part. I do see bad choices as being destructive and anti-life and so for me it is anything but an overstatement, but I suspect we will simply disagree there. But why should we think that our measure of whether some bad quality or action is allowable or acceptable should be the end result? Should a corporation which makes a lot of profit and has a huge influence on the world be given a pass on doing bad things as long as they continue to make a lot of profit and have a huge influence? Are you saying that doing bad things is necessary for good things to happen, a necessary evil as some have put it?


I wasn't saying anyone should get a pass for bad behavior. I do agree that it's hard to imagine a world where good things happen but bad things don't. I'm saying that as humans we have a dark side and even that dark side can be the source of important achievements. Are we slaves to our darkness? Sometimes, perhaps, but not necessarily.

I think that was God's will for them, that they would obey his instructions, which is why I think he gave them the instructions in the first place. But as you've pointed out at the start and as you've heard many times before, the opportunity was presented to them to choose whether they would obey or not, and in that way they were not automatons.


This is a good case in point; the first two humans on the planet and they couldn't resist disobeying god despite knowing him personally. If that's not convincing then I don't know what is.
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones.
~Bertrand Russell

:spongeb:
User avatar
spongebob
Senior member
Senior member
 
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:59 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Affiliation: Humanist - Bright

PreviousNext

Return to The Civility Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron