Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
no, like any fundy, you think you know better and are going to "save" the rest of us from them there other untrue religions. Yours is the true belief and will save us.
Technically, he is different in that he thinks his beliefs won't save your from his beliefs, but will only safe you from falsities. A Believed Truth merely for Truth's Sake is not the strong-suit of Immortality-Seeking religions.
When the heart and lungs stop functioning, the brain suffers from hypoxia, a lack of Oxygen, resulting in the release of large quantities of the hormone Dimethyltryptamine, or DMT for short, which is an hallucinogen.
N,N-dimethyltryptamine (DMT) is a potent endogenous hallucinogen present in the brain of humans and other mammals. Despite extensive research, its physiological role remains largely unknown. Recently, DMT has been found to activate the sigma-1 receptor (Sig-1R), an intracellular chaperone fulfilling an interface role between the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and mitochondria. It ensures the correct transmission of ER stress into the nucleus resulting in the enhanced production of antistress and antioxidant proteins. Due to this function, the activation of Sig-1R can mitigate the outcome of hypoxia or oxidative stress.
Those hallucinations may manifest themselves in any number of ways, resulting in Near-Death Experiences.
There is no god to get close to. Even if you could prove the existence of a god, you couldn't prove the existence of an after-life.
Why would it, since neither Heaven nor Hell actually exist.
It is clear from Mosaic Law that all punishments and rewards are temporal.
At no time does the Yahweh-Jesus thing or Mosaic Law or the Prophets ever threaten anyone with eternal torment in Hell. Likewise, at no time does the Yahweh-Jesus thing or Mosaic Law or the Prophets ever promise anyone with eternal life in Heaven.
The Old Testament is clear on the concept: Follow the Law, and you're rewarded in the here-and-now with prosperity, longevity and other blessings; ignore the Law and you suffer in the here-and-now from a lack of prosperity, illness, disease or death.
If you study the Old Testament, you'll notice that creates a tremendous conflict, because Manasseh, the most "wicked" king ever had the longest reign and the greatest prosperity, yet Josiah, the most "righteous" king ever was brutally killed in battle after reigning only a few years and the whole Hebrew kingdom suffered from a lack of prosperity, disease and enslavement.
The Latter Prophets and Jeremiah who wrote most of Deuteronomy had extreme difficulty reconciling reality and the promises of the Yahweh-Jesus thing, and jump through hoops attempting to explain it in a way that people wouldn't question it.
In particular with Deuteronomy, we see a shift from henotheism --the worship of a supreme god in a pantheon of gods to monaltrism -- the worship of one god to the exclusion of other gods, which results in the rewriting of the Mosaic Law into Deuteronomic Law (creating lots of contradictions).
The Hebrews had no concept of Hell, and the incorrectly translated sheol simply means a grave or the state of being dead, but without any kind of eternal torment. The word sheol was also figuratively used to mean a pit, with the nuance being a state of degradation.
It wasn't until the Greek translation into the Septuagint version that the Greeks conflated Sheol with Hades, and Erasmus compounds the error in his Textus Receptus, translating Sheol as a grave 29 times, as the figurative "pit" three times and as Hades 32 times.
In the New Testament gospels, the Greek Tartarus is used once and Hades eleven times. When Jesus employs Hades -- a pagan concept -- he is referring to a state of degradation his his parables, which is where he uses Hades most often. Even from its use in Revelation it is clear it is not an actual place.
The other word used is Gehenna, which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew gee Hinnom, a valley near Jerusalem where Hebrews sacrificed children to the god Moloch, until the practice was abolished by King Josiah. After that, because the place was considered an abomination, people left dead animals and dead people not fit to be properly buried (like criminals) there, so it was a rather nasty place signifying desolation and destruction, which is exactly how Jeremiah and Isaiah refer to it.
Although Gehenna appears 12 times, you'll see that it is used in the same stories appearing in the gospels, and aside from Jesus, the only person to use Gehenna was James. It is never used by Peter, Paul, Jude or John, nor does it appear in Revelation.
You can tell the concept of Heaven is still quite alien to the Hebrews, because Jesus doesn't describe it and is very vague and evasive about qualifies for entry into Heaven, telling people you have to sell everything and give the money to the poor, while telling others they have to give away everything to the poor, and still others he tells they have to be like the wind, or be born again, or hate their parents or drink his blood and eat his body. So it's basically a fool's errand.
Sad, so very sad to see such resistance to the existence of God largely, I suspect, because of the ignorant and often absurd beliefs ABOUT God that are so prevalent in society.
Sad, so very sad to see such resistance to the existence of God largely, I suspect, because of the ignorant and often absurd beliefs ABOUT God that are so prevalent in society.
That would be a large part, a more palatable God would, of course, make the general idea of God more palatable.
But no one expects a good god to let their name be slandered silently and the very concept of their being used for untruths.
At the same time, no "we are supposed to be oppressed" types would expect themselves to go around handing out palatable Gods to others (although such Gods would still be palatable to them given what they expect to get for their cronyism).
So what makes me think i know better than Gaylen? Well, I suspect that it is focussed on the procedures of Philosophy and overlooks relevant information, like humans being evolved and robots not.This appears to have led to a confusion of evolved instinctive reaction with qualia qua perception -experience. Just to give one example.
I agree. Genuine philosophy is a good discipline to get to probable (or possible) truths, but still relies on valid inputs. Building philosophical models that ignores relevant data are just meaningless exercises.
The brain handles "error", as in wrong signals, or code, better than computers. Computers lock up if the wrong set of electrons are sent down the tubes so to speak. Computers are only binary also, the brain is something else.
You can isolate a subroutine in a computer so that subroutines run fines but the over program doesn't work quite right. Or visa versa, called a "glitch". Lest say a welding bot that can play a game. Certain physical changes affect the welder but bot the game. You can insert code disrupts portions of the program to achieve the same thing.
While true, you are missing a key element. A computer program is our intelligence written as code at a specific time. We can rewrite that code in a better way, but the original code does not change.
The code I wrote works, I haven't found any bugs in it after I released it. All it does is manipulates 2 lists of numbers when learning, or multiplies these numbers with the inputs when processing. But the limited artificial intelligence is not in my code, it is embedded in the list of numbers. So while my code must run correctly, the intelligence in those numbers can handle errors.
For example, if I was to train my code to recognize an image in a grid, and then corrupted that image, my system should still be able to recognize that image provided the corruption was not to great. And I don't need to teach this, the system handles this all by itself, just like our brains.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
Your lucky to get to work with brains, thats some cool stuff you posted.
It's interesting when developing and testing the software, but most of my work is now data formatting and conversion. It pays well, but looking at a screen of 1's and 0's gets boring.
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
no, like any fundy, you think you know better and are going to "save" the rest of us from them there other untrue religions. Yours is the true belief and will save us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
Technically, he is different in that he thinks his beliefs won't save your from his beliefs, but will only safe you from falsities. A Believed Truth merely for Truth's Sake is not the strong-suit of Immortality-Seeking religions.
It is almost an axiom that the skeptic wants to know what's true whether they like it or not;the believer wants to believe what he likes,whether it's true or not.
Arach does not want to know or admit this, but prefers his biased misrepresentations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Sad, so very sad to see such resistance to the existence of God largely, I suspect, because of the ignorant and often absurd beliefs ABOUT God that are so prevalent in society.
Tedious to see reiterated misrepresentation of the atheist rationale in order to bash atheism with bias accusations. Mystic,have you caught Arach's disease?
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
no, like any fundy, you think you know better and are going to "save" the rest of us from them there other untrue religions. Yours is the true belief and will save us.
It is almost an axiom that the skeptic wants to know what's true whether they like it or not; the believer wants to believe what he likes, whether it's true or not.
It is your bias that is dominant, Arq. You cannot accept that a believer (like me) could simultaneously want to be sure what I believe is true and still believe my own experiences as valid. My personal satisfaction from our exchanges lies in the fact that I will be able to confront you in the next stage (with love of course).
Quote:
Arach does not want to know or admit this but prefers his biased misrepresentations.
Tedious to see reiterated misrepresentation of the atheist rationale in order to bash atheism with bias accusations. Mystic, have you caught Arach's disease?
They definitely will since some have such perverse pleasure in describing to us how much torture we are supposed to get in hell.
They are trying to blind us because they know the truth. They have already condemned all the loose women to hell and don't want us to have more fun than them - you know, having to worship all day long and boring stuff ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
