All the problems with Christianity

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, maybe don't stretch the boundaries so much, it makes you seem insane.

Sorry, I don't really understand what exactly you're asking here... would you be able to rephrase it?

How does the physical interact with the spiritual is what I think he's asking.

Thanks for dropping by AspE. Read this and make another diagnosis please. :)

You can skip the first cryptic part, but the fun part comes at the end. 'Trust me' you'll laugh. I can be a cosmic comedian too. hehe!

REVELATION 66 PART II

http://katiemiaaghogday.blogspot.com/20 ... on-66.html

Yes. Give us a falsifiable theory of how does the physical interact with the spiritual and evidence supporting it.

I'm happy enough just to see an explanation - with or without evidence.

Amen

Paul's doctrines are the main source of the nastiness and absurdity of Christianity. I don't see how both God and Paul could exist.

Are you asking for a scientific explanation? Because by definition science only applies to the physical universe...

Oh, whether science only applies to the physical universe is a debatable proposition. Some do argue for intrinsic methodological naturalism, but people who hold to pragmatic methodological naturalism will disagree with the definitional claim.

That being said, he is certainly looking for you to explain how your ideas make sense in the actual world in a way where you aren't just engaging in pure terminological play.

I just wanted to point out how it isn't applicable to expect a physical scientific explanation for something non-physical.

Having said that, my explanation of it would be that our physical brain is influenced by the non-physical aspect of our identity (call it spirit, soul, or whatever). Our brain then operates to control our purely physical body. So basically the brain would be acting as a necessary transmitter between the non-physical (spirit) and physical (body) aspects of ourselves.

The entire Cosmos is physical right down to the subatomic level.

Our non-material illusions are produced by neurons in our brains.

ruveyn

What do you mean by 'influence'? Are you saying that even the brain is physical, the effect of the soul on the brain cannot be measured by scientific method?

You really only gave an assertion though based upon the assumption that science is intrinsically methodologically naturalistic. I don't have to agree that science actually IS intrinsically methodologically naturalistic though, and causal models including issues of falsifiability don't intrinsically require that they are applied to physical or non-physical things.

In any causal model though, binary's not out of his right to want something like a scientific model. It's entirely reasonable for him to ask how this idea fits into the scientific realities we are aware of and how this idea is a necessary one to explain certain cognitive functions. Also, it's entirely reasonable for him to wonder what additional findings about the world may end up making your metaphysical assertion seem like a questionable affair. As if we're talking about the empirical workings of the brain, then as a matter of empirics it seems like naturalism could still logically be a contender, or at least your model of non-physical interaction be shown highly doubtful.


What does "influenced" mean in this case? How does "influence" work? How does the communication between both sides work? I mean, it's questionable to say "Oh, magic stuff does this!" because you're vague on everything. How does it work? Why does it work this way? Is it required by Occam's razor?

I'm starting to read this right now, 22 chapters lo and behold:

http://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Tarot ... ermeticism

I'm also about halfway though Philosophy of Spiritual Activity by Rudolph Steiner which so far is probably one of the tougher reads I've engaged in with respect ontology and epistemology (apparently he had extensive education in that and the sciences before he really began his writings as a Rosicrucian seer).

What I'm doing I realize though is a me thing, not a movement thing. Meditations on the Tarot was written by Valtentin Tomberg posthumous and Rudolph Steiner's stuff was mostly written between 1890's and 1920's. Regardless I'm noticing some deep insights. Still not sure how Rosicrucianism/Anthroposophy and Christian Hermeticism dovetail, contrast, etc. but it will be interesting to find out.