Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

Angels were created as eternal beings from their creation and have no need for a human shell. Our souls are contained in a human shell and that shell is trapped within time, space, and matter due to the fall of Adam and Eve. When we die, it's freed from those limitations. What happens after that depends on how obedient we were to God in this life. Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth or the Bible. It's an open book test.

Voyager has only located one blue marble is all of space. It's located in the sweet spot in our universe. Close enough to the Sun not to be too cold and lifeless and far enough away not to burn up. No scientist has proven we were not created and most are now on board with Intelligent Design, but still have trouble saying God did it if they want to publish.

The truth and the lie are still at war and our souls are the prize. Remember that God does have an adversary called by many names and he led a third of the angels into rebellion to God. So when bad things happen to people it's not God but Satan. If you are confused it's not God but Lucifer if your nuts it's not God but Belial, and if you murder your children it's Ba'al or Molech. The only one with more names than Satan is Jesus which are just further descriptions of each one's nature or character.

In Hebrew Satan or Abaddon means "Destruction" in Greek it's Apollyon. I was always a fan of Hannibal in my early teens and wondered why he lost to Rome. Many years later it was discovered that Carthage practiced child sacrifice by archeologist. Mystery solved and Rome even salted the ground of Carthage so nothing would ever grow there again. Today it's called Tunisia. The Pope's new buddies. The ignition point of the Arab Spring and the number one source of ISIS foreign fighters. So it seems the Prince of Persia (Iran) and the Prince of Carthage (Tunisia) are rising again and being true to the spirit that controls those areas. No mystery why they are being destructive once again.

I'm keeping my eyes and ears on Turkey where Jesus says is the Seat of Satan or Altar of Zeus. Funny it moved to Berlin in around 1930. Three years before Hitler began his rise to power. Then moved to Leningrad after WWII until 1958 (under Stalin who died in 1953) when it was returned to Germany. Two mass murderers of the 20th century. Probably just a coincident or maybe some of the elite really do worship Satan. I think it may move back to Pergamon someday soon. Just food for thought. Studying the Bible is exciting and educational.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

We are in complete agreement...

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be being discussed to any great length...

ExperienceCounts

ExperienceCounts

"My response to this premise...
I defy a brain to survive without a beating heart... Indeed I defy a brain to develop without a beating heart..."

When the lungs fail to get enough oxygen into the blood stream, carbon dioxide builds up in the blood stream, when the brain fails to get enough oxygen because of the increasing higher levels of carbon dioxide, brain function starts shutting down, organs start failing, until the heart stops. Official cause of death -heart failure. Arthritis was fuzing the lungs, causing buildup of carbon dioxide in the blood, shutting down brain function, which stopped the heart.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

My point was that no one organ represents life... Rather life is the sum of the organs as a whole...

ExperienceCounts

Thanks for being clear.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

"Devolved into a religious argument"??

85% of the world population have faith in a higher BEING, 1/3 of them are Christian, 2/4 of them are Muslim, and you think a discussion of "being" devolves if religion rears its ugly head???

Rose42

Most people point to their heart not their head. Who we are isn’t physical its spiritual. Our thoughts are spiritual.

Its a unique life when that egg is fertilized.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

It's not, once the baby is a being.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

As the original premise was based in science and regarding the concept of biological "being"... Yes... The use of the word "devolved" is appropriate....

As the Lord is equally responsible for the creation of all natural laws (science), it behooves Believers to be able to make arguments for morality based upon scientific principles as well...

As JW pointed out - no soul has suffered from having its body harmed...

And as PeterS pointed out - natural abortions do occur on a regular basis...

Both premises might lead one to infer that abortion is not actually a sin...

This requires that we qualify an intrinsic value to the flesh that the soul inhabits....
Which is what we are attempting to do...

At which point does a physical body (biological construct) become a "being"?

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Nope.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

If we are going to "qualify an intrinsic value to the flesh that the soul inhabits", then we must include the meaning of life itself. This is something science alone cannot determine.

The idea that we as living beings can subjectively determine the value of life is ludicrous.

Science explores the biological conditions of life. In religion and ethics, the inviolability or sanctity of life is a principle of implied protection regarding aspects of sentient life that are said to be holy, sacred, or otherwise of such value that they are not to be violated. Some cultures on earth love their neighbors, other cultures destroy them.

Science cannot explain:

1) Existential Truth: Science cannot prove that you aren’t merely a brain in a jar being manipulated to think this is all actually happening (think of something like in the movie “The Matrix”.) It also cannot prove that the world wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age (and with fake memories in your head, and half-digested food in your stomach, etc). However, it’s still rational to believe that our memories are true and that the world is real.

2) Moral Truth: Science cannot prove that rape is evil. While it is possible to demonstrate, for example, that there are negative physical or psychological effects of rape, there is no scientific test that can prove it is evil. Science can describe how the natural world is, but moral truth carries an “oughtness” (how things should be) that goes beyond what merely is.

3) Logical Truth: Consider the statement, “Science is the only way to really know truth.” How could you prove that statement by science? It is actually self-refuting because there is no scientific test you could use to prove that it is true! Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work.

4) Historical Truth: Science cannot prove that Donald Trump won the 2016 United States presidential election. There is no scientific test we could perform to prove it. We could have an investigation if we wanted to confirm that he did actually win, but the method for proving historical truths is different from testing scientific truths since historical truths are by nature non-repeatable.

5) Experiential Truth: Science cannot prove that your spouse loves you. When asked why so-and-so loves you, you may cite precedent (times when their behavior demonstrates their love for you), but this is a particular type of historical truth. There is no scientific test that can confirm a lifetime of experience of knowing a person.

Apart from some microbes and plants, nearly all the living things in the world reproduce sexually. It is something that we take so much for granted that we don’t realize how much of an evolutionary anomaly it is. An entire half of a species—the males—are unable to produce any offspring at all while still using up the same amount of resources from the environment. Why go through so much effort to develop a mechanism that is a clear disadvantage in the long run?

One of the most favored theories is that sex helps breed out harmful mutations, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. When scientists studied 700 genes of various organisms, they found the number of harmful mutations to be a whopping 0.5 per individual per generation. For the drawbacks that come with it, that is not enough to justify sexual reproduction. As much as we like to have it, sex remains something that we still don’t quite understand.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

As noted earlier...
Any such value we could assign would be subjective....
The discussion can help to clarrify and narrow down the parameters of the value...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Given the nature of life, clarification and expanding the parameters would be much more appropriate. Life is infinitely more than just a collection of interacting organisms.

JW

Blade_Runner


If we are going to "qualify an intrinsic value to the flesh that the soul inhabits", then we must include the meaning of life itself. This is something science alone cannot determine. Science is quite capable of determining what life is. Any meaning applied to life is entirely subjective and quantifiable only to the accepted parameters of the individual making the consideration.

The idea that we as living beings can subjectively determine the value of life is ludicrous. We do it all of the time. The value of a cow’s life is somewhere around $1.10 a pound on the hoof. A mouse’s life is set at zero value. The value of a purebred dog or cat may be established at several thousand dollars.

Science explores the biological conditions of life. In religion and ethics, the inviolability or sanctity of life is a principle of implied protection regarding aspects of sentient life that are said to be holy, sacred, or otherwise of such value that they are not to be violated. Some cultures on earth love their neighbors, other cultures destroy them. [color=red]If you are going to allow the drawing of conclusions from implied truths in religion and ethics then you must also allow the same in science.

Science cannot explain:

1) Existential Truth: Science cannot prove that you aren’t merely a brain in a jar being manipulated to think this is all actually happening (think of something like in the movie “The Matrix”.) It also cannot prove that the world wasn’t created 5 minutes ago with the appearance of age (and with fake memories in your head, and half-digested food in your stomach, etc). However, it’s still rational to believe that our memories are true and that the world is real. Reality as measured is the first principal of science. It is a conclusion drawn from the implications of experience as understood by the mind.

2) Moral Truth: Science cannot prove that rape is evil. While it is possible to demonstrate, for example, that there are negative physical or psychological effects of rape, there is no scientific test that can prove it is evil. Science can describe how the natural world is, but moral truth carries an “oughtness” (how things should be) that goes beyond what merely is. Rape is not evil except as defined by human society. When a spider, a tiger or a bear engages sexually with a mate, that exchange is not evil irrespective of the coercion involved. It simply is the organism responding to its genetic programming. Rape is the same for homo sapiens except we have made it a violation of a social more and defined it as evil.

3) Logical Truth: Consider the statement, “Science is the only way to really know truth.” How could you prove that statement by science? It is actually self-refuting because there is no scientific test you could use to prove that it is true! Science cannot prove logic to be true because it assumes and requires logic in order for it to work.
The same trust can be granted to science as that which you grant to religion. Basic assumptions in both areas are grants of trust. In religion, the assumption is that a creation requires a sentient creator. In science/philosophy, the basic assumption is that a string of related facts which hold true reaches a conclusion that can be relied upon.

4) Historical Truth: Science cannot prove that Donald Trump won the 2016 United States presidential election. There is no scientific test we could perform to prove it. We could have an investigation if we wanted to confirm that he did actually win, but the method for proving historical truths is different from testing scientific truths since historical truths are by nature non-repeatable. Math is a tool of science. The rules governing the 2016 election provide the parameters. Within those parameters, Donald Trump won the election per the mathematical standards that apply.

5) Experiential Truth: Science cannot prove that your spouse loves you. When asked why so-and-so loves you, you may cite precedent (times when their behavior demonstrates their love for you), but this is a particular type of historical truth. There is no scientific test that can confirm a lifetime of experience of knowing a person. Religion cannot prove that your spouse loves you. It can only provide behavioral parameters with which you can judge the fidelity of your mate’s devotion to you.

Apart from some microbes and plants, nearly all the living things in the world reproduce sexually. It is something that we take so much for granted that we don’t realize how much of an evolutionary anomaly it is. An entire half of a species—the males—are unable to produce any offspring at all while still using up the same amount of resources from the environment. Why go through so much effort to develop a mechanism that is a clear disadvantage in the long run? Actually, most bees, wasps, etc. and some frogs, salamanders and geckos reproduce parthenogenetically as well. Occasionally, parthenogenesis occurs among higher animals. Sexual reproduction is hardly a disadvantage. It requires robust individuals and provides the best insurance for the survival of the species.

One of the most favored theories is that sex helps breed out harmful mutations, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. When scientists studied 700 genes of various organisms, they found the number of harmful mutations to be a whopping 0.5 per individual per generation. For the drawbacks that come with it, that is not enough to justify sexual reproduction. As much as we like to have it, sex remains something that we still don’t quite understand. Sex ensures competition for mates. Again, providing the best insurance for the survival of the species.