Please read this excellent post at Cranmer’s blog by guest contributor Neil Richardson.
Triablogue also has a short post on this topic this week.
My hope is that pro-abortion laws will be overturned in the USA and the UK. Perhaps this is the time in history for Roe v Wade to be reversed, and perhaps a new government will be formed in the UK that will prioritise Christian values.
There is a great spiritual war going on at the moment, intensifying as the end of the age approaches. The world is being shaken, and only the immoveable Kingdom of God will be left at the end of it.
All Along the Watchtower 
Of course the Eccles blogspot (a one-time occasional commenter) did one on this today as well: https://ecclesandbosco.blogspot.com/2019/05/churches-to-say-alabama-rather-than.html
LikeLiked by 2 people
You realize forced pregnancy is recognized as slavery in the UN statutes. I think they are correct on that. Increased fertility rates through religion has passed its evolutionary usefulness. I think RCC should back off of this.
LikeLike
Is that what this is all about? . . . evolutionary usefulness? Is that all your life means to you that you survived your embryonic start?
Tell me something Jim: do you think it is important to preserve and have laws against disturbing the habitats of things like the barn owl? How about the laws protecting turtle eggs? Are they more important than a potential human life with a soul created in the image and likeness of God?
I just don’t understand the new value set that emerged in the last 50 years. Sorry.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I support those things, sure. I also support other life and personal choice. Forcing people to have kids they don’t want shows little faith in your master plan. If you believe god is in control, what’s all the worry about when a woman in Georgia has an abortion, it doesn’t infringe on your ability to worship. You just need more numbers at any cost?
What is the image and likeness of god? Do we look like him? What is his image and likeness?
LikeLike
Sorry, I started a new thread in reply.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No problem. I’ll check it out or go away. Whichever you prefer. I’ve had some interesting discussions here before with Phillip A. Haven’t seen him in a while.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He pops in occasionally but is busy taking courses in theology at the moment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do read most posts on here. My personal blog, since it more or less wasn’t being used has been salvaged for theological discussion groups that I moderate. I will say that I am against abortion but I tend to use philosophical and scientific arguments to support my position because I think the support is strong there and I don’t think to make a revelation argument will change anyone’s mind. And I also do not think I will change anyone’s mind in an instant on the subject.
I generally take the position that we’re all in a particular stage of human development and that a human being is a separate life when it has its own unique DNA with a genetic code that will more or else tell us personality, male pattern baldness, its own blood type etc. Now, there is often an argument of viability, but, of course, that varies on where the child was born and also children prior to the age of a teenager are dependant on their parents for survival. People also make the “parasite” argument, but a fetus(which is Latin for baby, so it doesn’t bother me to use it) doesn’t fit the definition of a parasite because it’s of the same species; therefore, it doesn’t have the host/parasite relationship.
You defend personal autonomy, which I think is important to a degree; however, I do not think the concept forgoes things such as duties. I believe that a mother and father who has a six-year-old cannot decide that a child is somehow violating their personal autonomy even though the child is still dependent on the work and services of their bodies. So, even if the fetus, which has it’s own unique genetic code, is in the Mother’s womb, I think the parents have already made their free choice and now have a duty to take care of this unique human being; no different from a toddler except being in a different developmental stage.
Now, one could argue that tumors have their own DNA since the code went haywire and change. The problem with this argument is that it actually supports that a fetus is its own being. For instance, if you cloned the DNA of a tumor, you wouldn’t get the host, but you would get another tumor. There difference being is that the tumor is not a development of a stage of human growth but rather a malfunction of the genetic code, so in that respect, it isn’t my body, my decision, the fetus is a different being.
Philosophically, growth/motion/change is either accidental like your height hair, even if you have five fingers, etc or it’s substantial like your nature coming into being or going out of being. For example, if I lose my arm, I do not become less than a human. However, when it egg meets with sperm both of their natures cease to be either an egg or sperm, there is a substantial change in those two natures, as they go out of being and one nature is formed in the zygote. When the zygote develops it never changes its substance with a substantial change but rather grows in its developmental course to a possible adult human.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Great comment and reasonable as always. I will think about your points here. I am open to changing my mind about many things when better reasoning is evident. One thing about duty. Even that can be a tricky one when we are in a difficult position and don’t know what to do. Is it duty to bare a child you cannot provide for outside a drug addicted slum? These are questions I can’t answer for those involved. I do think abortion is far to common as a remedy to another issue. It’s a nasty business, but maybe one solution is as compassionate as the other. Sorry. Mothers with no assistance to go the journey alone is endangering her own, already fragile mental health. I suspect most of us here are pretty well off. Well enough to have devices and internet with the leisure to use it. As a medic I saw many, many mentally ill drug addicted pregnant women having their babies in my ambulance. Never been to the doctor. Never even planned for day one what they would do. Is it better to bring these children to the difficult world. I think not, but if a plan were to accommodate them I’d be open to that.
Now I live in the mountains far removed from the city ills. It’s easier to just be silent.
LikeLike
I’m actually in favor to give as much needed assistance to Mothers. There needs to be incentive to carry the child to full term.
If I have to have my taxes raised for these services and the to assist with time off from work to take care of their children–so be it. In my opinion, too much is squabbled over a waste of tax-payer money, this is not it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember reading about Israel in ancient times and it was an honor to have a child. This system now has made it very hard for it not to be a burden, and it shows. It’s a challenge in the best of circumstance.
LikeLike
If your moral and political position is for women to have their children. Put in the expressway, make it a no-brainer to say “sure, I’ll have the child.”
Want to promote adoption? Tax breaks, all involved.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The solutions really are simple. I think it’s designed to be difficult To keep us at odds with each other. I don’t really know anyone in favor of abortion, but it’s a solution to the difficulties this era of life presents us. This may have to be repaired with an end around on the system. Nice to see you. You always give me something to think on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By the way, I would like to know why you support ‘other life and personal choice’? If we are all simply a bunch of subatomic particles of the same value (value being something or a purpose that is above itself) then that same value is actually void and meaningless . . . completely without any value. All things are made up of the same star materials . . . and thereby devoid of any intrinsic value. Why should we have laws to protect you or anything else? Let the survival of the fittest play out and let the cosmos expand into total darkness and fade out into a large void?. Why don’t you rob someone if they have that which you want or kill them if necessary? It is your choice and you have no God to judge your choice. So simply go back to your beginnings and live like an ape . . . for that is all there is; a chaotic universe without value or meaning and no laws apply. Whatever happens, happens. That is all the meaning life has and it is the same for all of us, all beasts, plants, rocks, elements, gases, stars, solar systems and galaxies. It’s just stuff . . . useless and meaningless stuff.
But its hard to have a discussion with people who have no way of giving human life the dignity that God gave to us. So having these discussions with atheists is always sort of empty . . . for everything in that exists signifies nothing for an atheist.
LikeLike
There is nothing empty about me. I feel quite fine. I think you are confusing me with some line of dogma I don’t ascribe to. My feelings are my own. I have never read an atheist book nor watch their videos. I am just an observant person making my way. I’ve about 400 posts I’ve written without the opinions of the experts. It has to be that way. Biases are too easily come by.
The reason I care is self serving. We should have laws to protect me because I say so. That is what my autonomy demands.
LikeLike
If you defend slicing up tiny babies, you are a disgusting human being.
You pooh-pooh the alleged bankruptcy of the moral argument for God’s existence, whilst simultaneously proving its validity by advertising your own moral bankruptcy.
Evolution may explain why people like me have scruples about slicing up tiny babies, but only hubris and original sin can explain why you and people like you have managed to persuade yourself that this is ok. No animal displays any evidence of such conscious malignancy as that displayed by amoral atheists in their desire to slice up tiny babies.
If mankind – including you – is just the by-product of a mindless, chaotic universe, why should anyone listen to your ravings? What possible persuasive force could the utterances of an accidentally animated ball of cells be, notwithstanding it thinks it is a rational human being?
If reason does not avail, all that is left is force. The devil is strong, but God is stronger.
The choice to believe in God is ultimately the choice of something over nothing; of order over chaos.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t think you read my thread very well. I didn’t say I support it. I said it’s not my call and I support a persons autonomy. Calling me names is showing your Christian colors. Defending forced conversions at the tip of a sword based on bible verse, that makes you worse than I.
LikeLike
I support a person’s autonomy, until he or she commits murder. Supporting autonomy, including murder, would appear to amount to supporting slicing up tiny babies. Or would you like to put a stop to that?
I don’t believe in forced conversions. I simply said, if reason avails nothing, the only thing you have left is force.
I believe reason is virile, and therefore I do not need to resort to force. Forced conversion is an atrocity.
LikeLike
You defend a religion that did use force for a thousand years. I’m not in favor of slicing babies. I am in favor of education over failed Christian morality. Education actually works. Then you still reach your objective. Win win. Religion has failed to help this matter by regulating nature as a sin. Those darn hormones always win over the doctrine.
LikeLike
Well if I do, I do it ignorantly, because my understanding is that it is against Catholic teaching to compel people to become Christians. (Mystici Corporis, Pius XII). It’s very convenient to smear the Catholic Church with the sins of her members, but I don’t defend anyone’s sinful action, even if he is a Catholic. Christ did not force anyone to agree with Him.
Though it has been held that some forced baptisms are valid, this was not associated with approbation of the practice, even in the middle ages.
As to “those damn hormones” they don’t always win in my household if I have anything to do about it. You should learn to get a grip on your disordered affections.
“Oh I committed adultery again. Ah well. It was just those damn hormones winning over doctrine.”
By the Word everything was made that was made.
By the flesh, apart from the Word, comes only licentiousness, gluttony, fornication, greed, envy, falsehood, idolatry, murders and the rest of that crowd.
LikeLike
Oh, and by the way, just to clear it up: you’re fine with letting women seek out doctors who want to slice up their babies for money?
Just so long as we “educate” them?
LikeLike
I never said that. You didn’t read the thread.
LikeLike
So you want to put a stop to it?
That’s great. In that case, per the infallible criterion set out in my first post to you, you acquit yourself of being – on that count – a disgusting human being.
But (and this may be uncharitable in me) I suspect there’s a ‘but’…?
LikeLike
But what? All I ever said was it’s not my call to make and I have enough compassion to allow a despondent woman to make that choice herself.
LikeLike
That’s not good enough. Where’s your “compassion” for the tiny baby? If a woman said to me: I will not abort my baby, if you will take it and clothe it and feed it and be a father to it, I would take the baby. I would pay her any money I could spare or borrow to avert the death.
Your compassion is indifference. You would not say that of an adult person stabbing somebody else (I surmise?).
I was raised in an Atheist household. My “journey” (excusing the sick-making expression) to religion began when I realised that I could not justify my natural detestation for abortion (amongst other outrages) within an atheistic framework.
The problem is that you just can’t bring yourself to condemn this awful thing.
That is why your philosophy has nothing of value to say, and why I retain my judgement that you are a disgusting human being.
LikeLike
I’ve adopted two from mothers that couldn’t. You? I’m not indifferent. I just value more than you do when it comes to the rights of humans already here. I don’t like abortion either, but it’s not my call. Sorry you think I’m disgusting. I’ve spent my life serving others in need and adopting, fostering, paying for medical bills. In a perfect world there would be no need for this compromise. It’s pretty difficult even for normal circumstance. Can’t imagine the mentally ill or distraught. Btw, it cost me $40,000 for my two adoptions. That should be fixed. It should be free. Right now it’s a deterrent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Regardless, of the difference of opinion, I am a supporter of adoption and I thank you. It is my opinion that Christians, in the West, who do have more than enough resources should be leading the charge and emptying the foster homes. And with that being said, to be fair, it is easier said than done. It’s an expensive and slow process with a lot of pitfalls that deter.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That puts a rather different light on it.
I apologise for my unworthy despising of you; you are obviously a person of unusual calibre, and your example puts me to shame on this point.
LikeLike
Apology accepted. 🤝 No worries mate. Most of the division in the world is misunderstandings.
LikeLike
I also agree with the point about giving children the facts when they ask for them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And instead of bashing me, where’s your solution? Jail time? The rack for these women? I think you could add something rather than condemn me for discussion.
LikeLike
On the positive side, I would agree with you that constructive alternatives for raising unwanted children should be better supported and legal obstacles – where onerous – should be cleared away.
On the negative side, it seems clear that whoever executes or procures an abortion commits murder and should suffer the supreme penalty. I only except from this women who are coerced into taking this course of action.
Abortion mills should be shut down and abortion utterly outlawed. I think then a great number of people would think twice about getting into a situation where procuring an abortion would seem desirable, and “abortion as contraception” would cease .
Outlawing of contraception would – if it could be effectively enforced – re-establish a connection in the public consciousness between the sexual act and babies, the absence of which appears to be the principal cause of the explosion of unwanted pregnancies we see all over the place.
No contraception is 100% effective, even if used perfectly. Only abstinence can effectively prevent conception, guaranteed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abstinence will never be a solution. I think we bite the bullet and work towards an achievable solution. Even the best parenting (preachers daughter) proves that physiology is pretty king. Funny thing, we never told our kids it was wrong, but educated them on consequences. We took away the mystery. They’ve all waited. Granted they had relations before marriage, but they were old enough they were out on their own. Not sure if I was just lucky, or if there is something to the madness. The allure of a taboo is genuine. If you want more teen sex, forbid it.
LikeLike
I don’t think there are any solutions – only trade-offs. Abstinence outside of marriage is a moral imperative for all; but it has been found by experience that people sin.
I think the biggest factor is the desire to have a proper stable family life. If children are raised properly, this is what they will want for themselves and their own children. Even if they do commit “youthful transgressions” before settling down.
I think labouring any point is counter-productive. I do also think that making it clear that extra-marital shenanigans are not acceptable helps children to bear up to the responsibilities of chastity.
It struck me as very strange that my relatives had no objection when I was not a Christian to me carrying on a sexual relationship. But they had real problems about me becoming a Christian and deciding to get married and “tying myself down.”
This kind of hypocritical liberalism is toxic.
Life is hard. Responsibility matters. Love makes all things bearable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A little caveat here. One of my kids I adopted as an infant. We got her the day she was born—It had been arranged for several months. She was born to heroine and meth. Spent 30 days in the NICU on benzodiazepines and paragoric. She will never be able to be on her own. I love her and provide for her, but honestly sometimes I wonder who all this benefitted. She is unhappy to be alive and is a constant issue for everyone she comes in contact with. Thoughts?
LikeLike
No human being is competent to judge the value of a human life. That way leads to the gas chambers.
Perhaps the greater part of earthly happiness is based on delusion. But it seems to me that love has an intrinsic value, and so does suffering – when borne heroically.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If they don’t want them they can adopt them out. There is a waiting line for babies out there . . . most of my friends who adopted had to get them from eastern Europe or Africa. Nobody forces the people to have kids and raise them . . . we only want the legal protection we all have from being killed. They are people from crying out loud.
God allows free will and we are justly punished should we choose evil over good. It is not about numbers it is about what is right and just. If you want to reduce numbers why don’t you kill everyone as soon as they quit working and become a drag on society?
I see you don’t believe in God at all. That is sad and I will pray for your soul though it is doubtful that you believe you even have one.
LikeLike
Well I am an atheist but that doesn’t mean I fail to understand that the universe is quite complex with differing energies and people who are attuned to them. Personally I have no spiritual inklings at all. I did try for many years (50) but failed. God never answered my prayers or revealed himself to me. Just as he hasn’t anyone else. Neurology and hormones, but nothing more than that. My faith was strong enough to mature into integrity, then I could no longer pretend to believe.
As far as abortion goes, I personally dislike the entire idea, but, the science is pretty strong and the law errs on the side of caution with the 23 week thing. I do think it’s a better option for many people, but it’s not my call—I’m not them. I know how traumatic pregnancy can be mentally, even for the best prepared.
Adopting Africans is kind of novel. I’ve adopted two here and it cost me about 40,000. That’s a problem that should be fixed. I’m not as heartless as you think. I’ve raised 4 not my own and have other troubled kids in and out. I’m also compassionate enough to let a vulnerable woman abort if she chooses. If you believe in god, those spirits will get another shot anyway. What’s the big worry?
LikeLike
Sounds like you believe in reincarnation . . . which does not at all sound like the traditional atheist. And no, the spirits will not get another shot anyway . . . don’t know where you picked that up from.
What does the complexity of the universe have to do with anything . . . or energies for that matter (energy being a scientific ‘I don’t know’ word for bundles of unknown stuff that clings together for no explicable reason or repels itself from another energy that is of unknown stuff . . . they call that, as we all know, positive and negative charges. What it is has never been explained as it is a mystery itself and yet it is more mystical than theology and the idea of God (even if it is simply the Einstein idea of some form of intelligence). Much of the science works but they still only know the observable or believe in the conceivable (by human intelligence). It’s truly fantastical.
You keep speaking of values and things like integrity or compassion, or being heartless etc. How is that germane to a meaningless universe which is not created to an end of any consequence. There is no judgment for anything so why is it that many atheists still want to hold to these ‘values’ which are simply made up words for actions that one takes totally out of desire. Why balance any decision on a scale of good or bad? It is simply your desire . . . just like an animal will eat what it sees as food and have no guilt for killing another of its kind or another creature. It’s simply their genetic makeup.
Maybe you believe that the dataset of good and bad is also genetic? But if so, then why did people develop this in evolutionary circumstances? To what avail? I presume so that we would make enemies of one another and fight and kill one another to keep our populations down. Its simply being who we are. No value judgements are needed for anything we do: war and peace is equivalent, good and bad is equivalent and there is no arbitrator other than the law of the State which is totally unjust and unfounded since we are simply being who we are and acting as we were created.
LikeLike
That’s a tremendous Gish Gallup of bullshit points! Slow down man. You want to talk about where morality comes from? That is easy. Also the balance of nature and elements, oil and water—all elements find their equilibrium or homeostatic balance, and so donee. Things find their compatibility and incompatible We are no different.
I’ve found the morality argument for a god to be the absolute weakest for the simple reason that we have hard evidence that this thing we call “morality,” which is really nothing but a formative sense of good (positive) and bad (negative) behaviour, is a product of neurological processing power. The more neurons, the more accute an organisms understanding of it. Countless studies, across numerous species, prove this beyond any rational doubt. It is not a human phenomena, and its anything but complicated.
It’s a specie wise phenomenon this idea of fairness. Monkeys, birds, dolphins, dogs, elephants, all work in a quest to be treated fairly. It’s not complicated.
LikeLike
You’re saying all these animals have a value system that genetically arises from the number of neurons we have? Maybe we should pray to the neurons then.
But we are still stuck at these little packets of (I don’t know what it is energy) in a neuron can give life to something, think, move, create a value system, enjoy art, create art, love beauty and seek order rather than chaos. None of that seems possible without at the very least believing in natural law; that which is placed within man to recognize the basics of what is right or wrong.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Don’t overthink this. You may be tempted to cheat on your wife. Now you think about it and realize the odds are, she’ll find out. Then you lose the house, become a visiting father while some other guy parks his truck in your spot. So, hmm, I think I’ll just play it safe. It’s very self regulating and societal pressures work wonders. The amount of neurons equals the organisms ability to process the risk and reward. I don’t cheat on my wife because I love her and would not want to cause her pain. She returns the loyalty, but it’s all reward system.
Hormones also play a big role in this. Everything we do, it turns out, is for those little reward centers being fed in mere micrograms. That is why junkies trade their habit for religion. And it’s usually an uptempo style with lots of bells and whistles. Trading one addiction for another to reap the dopamine wherever it’s dispensed.
LikeLike
Please explain love to me since that is almost as mystical a word as energy. I suppose that love is releasing serotonin in sufficient quantities to make you feel good and little else.
So your life is regulated by risk and reward only. It is no wonder that while you were spending 50 years seeking God or the spiritual that you never found it. You never could believe in the reward and were therefore completely incapable to take the plunge . . . or risk. It makes one vulnerable.
Since everything is merely hormones and stuff (other words for energy that is combined is specific order to create any substance) which order your life. Junkies find a reward that eclipses the reward of the dope. It’s simple. Martyrs will sacrifice themselves for love of God. That is why I wonder what kind of regulatory merit there is for someone who might want to do what most of us consider abominations to one another. Live and let live. In that way you could simply live your life of relativism and reap the dopamine of self-love and licentious living. Narcissists are all non-believers in God and they love to manipulate others. But if I were purely an atheist then this would seem to be a normal way to live life . . . since you only live once let’s go all out for ourselves and forget things like love or God as they are only things one might feign in order to manipulate others and get what I want.
LikeLike
You know nothing of my prior life as a dedicated Christian. I was as true a believer as anyone. These are my own observations after losing faith. That’s all. You may want to believe you do these things for a more honorable reason, but you don’t. It’s all fear or reward.
As far as love, I am satisfied that I’ve found my groove. I know how to love more consistently than the god of the Bible, who is capricious at best. I’ve never killed anyone over a land dispute, and as Augustine so thoroughly demonstrated as a Christian Right, I’ve never forced someone to believe at the tip of a sword, nor condemned them to hell for a thought. So I know how love works for me, and I’ve seen how it works for the Christian god. I’ll take the high road if I’m doubt, not sheepishly follow into battle to satisfy the men of words.
LikeLike
Sounds like you have made yourself more of God than the God of the Scriptures. Well done. You are precisely that man I envisioned who lives solely with himself at the center of his life. I hope you are at least as happy in this one and that someday you might walk through that door which will allow you to have a life after this journey ends that is just as happy. In the meanwhile I will try to work out my salvation with fear and trembling. For the hand of almighty God is shown in the fathomless universe that is obviously formed by intelligence far beyond what what a human might be capable. Scientists didn’t invent the mathematical formulas of physics, they only discovered them like an archaeologist who uncovered a civilization in their digs. So why are things ordered according to our mathematical formulas?
I think we agree to disagree, Jim. For I would answer God and you might simply say that it is chance.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Chances you are right doesn’t fall in line with the evidence. As far as intelligence, every discipline of science has dismantled the notion of a god did it. All but one. First cause. We’re actually making huge strides there as well. Hope you have a plan B.
LikeLike
I’ve read Stephen Hawkings and yet he proves nothing. It is a matter of what you will to believe or disbelieve. Nobody in science can answer the very basis of reality which has to do with energy and nobody wants to talk about energy having the capacity of thought when put together in some strange way. I’d even be willing to read something by somebody who believes that each atomic particle has some intelligence or life to it. At least that would be a start for a conversation. They have less than nothing to base their assumption on what is observable; a moral universe, men who are vastly different from other creatures and who can question their reality and their meaning and all sorts of incredible things that are independent of stacking up energy balls and then they turn into meat robots.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One thing I’ve learned is arguing facts and evidence against faith is I’m arguing with a physiology. The neurons are hardwired through submission and repetition. That too is an uncomfortable truth, but I know. I was there.
LikeLike
And this explains the insane and the sane? The believer and the non-believer? The moral man and the immoral man? The lazy man and the industrious man? The ignorant man and the intelligent man?
LikeLike
The difference between most of these scenarios is luck. Wiring and luck. You are a few errant neurons away from being a serial is luck. Studies in TBI price this beyond any reasonable doubt.
LikeLike
And no, I don’t believe in reincarnation. Would it change anything if I did? I believe in nothing. It turns out belief is rewarded as some virtue but is without any substance. Such thought convictions are the seedbed of division, war, and hate. The bait and switch by Christianity was a masterful ploy on the weakness of human psychology. Condemn pride, honor faith (which is the ultimate manifestation of pride) —Strong belief without evidence. Funny that when beliefs are challenged, norepinephrine is released and stimulates the fight or flight. You now argue for the right to hope.
It doesn’t matter if you like this setup the way you like it or not. It just is, and belief does not make it fact.
LikeLike
That’s not true. You believe in something. You believe that you are your own arbiter and you do not find any significance that belief in something greater than yourself is worth the denial of self for a greater good. Why give up something unless there is a greater good? Why fight for your country, protect your wife and children, obey the laws of men who do hold out spiritual values and virtues for us to imitate?
It’s not religion itself that is the seedbed of division as all animals fight for territory or pack or tribe or flock etc. Are they united? Man is the only one of these things that has tried to make law to reign in the animal instincts and raise us to that which we were created for; God Himself. It isn’t perfect and never will be. But at least the human has found his teleological end and it isn’t material; it’s spiritual. For our end is God whether we like the idea or not, nothing else makes man, man. Everything has and end for which he was made . . . and without God we would be the only creature made without a teleological meaning to our lives. Science won’t help us answer the question; “What was I made for”.
Yes, norepinephrine is released as one’s ‘principles’ are at stake. The same norepinephrine that is released in an atheist when his principles are also being challenged or made to be nothing.
It’s not up to me to like this setup nor up to you. It is up to the Creator who gave you life and breath and just because you do not believe in a Creator does not make your belief a fact.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You have the burden of proof Scoop. Your making extraordinary claims of creation and a god. Is this general revelation or personal? I can’t believe that after the years of effort any rational being would show me the door and condemn me for waking though it. There is no true belief. Let me ask a question. If I choose to believe something I don’t, is that pretending to believe? It isn’t genuine at all. On the pretense of hope you’ll admit to believe something you have a choice in. It really doesn’t make belief very honorable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you could explain the science and chemistry based upon molecules made of bundles of energy (I wonder what differentiates them from each other?) then perhaps the burden of proof is on you to explain why you conscious, recognize beauty and can write a sentence and create a story simply because of energy being put together in some sort of random way that ended up with you being you instead of something else or somebody else. So if there is no true belief, you belief regarding no true belief is also negated in the statement itself.
You chose your belief as I did mine. They are not the same and you would have a harder time explaining yours than I would mine. But you are right about pretending to believe in that which you truly don’t. Nobody would tell you to do that. You have to ponder what is real in this universe and what is not; what gives us order rather than chaos, why men can love, create, ponder things as vast as the universe and as mysterious as the Author of bring about something out of nothing.
LikeLike
There are plenty of studies that bear this out. The real path to god is in stimulating certain areas of the brain that simulate hormones and getting a “spiritual response. Same as a good sermon. Same as a convincing lie too!
Google scholar is a good place to look, but there is a lot of free stuff too. None of it supports your belief, by the way. If you ever get the opportunity to be a test subject, take it. That would be fun interesting. But, if you’re afraid to see the evidence you already have your answer. They can also duplicate the outer body experience simply by denying or adding stimulation to certain regions. Astral projection too. It’s all in our own heads. Couple this with regional belief biases and you have a church.
LikeLike
That suggestion sounds a bit silly to me. Really? Google Scholar? Why would I place my faith and believe in the ‘authority’ of these men? Am I not as capable of conjecture as they? If I were you I’d ponder the following:
“As all men are touched by God’s love, so all are also touched by the desire for His intimacy. No one escapes this longing; we are all kings in exile, miserable without the Infinite. Those who reject the grace of God have a desire to avoid God, as those who accept it have a desire for God. The modern atheist does not disbelieve because of his intellect, but because of his will; it is not knowledge that makes him an atheist…The denial of God springs from a man’s desire not to have a God—from his wish that there were no Justice behind the universe, so that his injustices would fear not retribution; from his desire that there be no Law, so that he may not be judged by it; from his wish that there were no Absolute Goodness, that he might go on sinning with impunity. That is why the modern atheist is always angered when he hears anything said about God and religion—he would be incapable of such a resentment if God were only a myth. His feeling toward God is the same as that which a wicked man has for one whom he has wronged: he wishes he were dead so that he could do nothing to avenge the wrong. The betrayer of friendship knows his friend exists, but he wished he did not; the post-Christian atheist knows God exists, but he desires He should not.”
― Fulton J. Sheen, Peace of Soul: Timeless Wisdom on Finding Serenity and Joy by the Century’s Most Acclaimed Catholic Bishop
LikeLike
Google scholar is primarily university and clinical research. Neurology, psychology, physics, religion, etc. There is a lot to learn outside the lens if faith. I get you though. For many years I avoided everything that didn’t support what I already thought—what I was told I believed. Gave away some real interest to learn from the poisoned well of religious approved statements.
I don’t go on sinning, as you may imply. I live quite the clean and simple life. Give toncharity and volunteer in the community, so stop your judgements. At least I don’t hide behind a mask of piety and carry on as usual like most Christians. I’m not angry at anybody. Why are you all here so mad? Your god has done nothing for your cause. I guess that would put one on edge. The readers here are a judgemental bunch. Heaven forbid someone not toe the party line.
I desire nothing of a relationship with something you all admit you can’t know or comprehend, but he sometimes tinkers in the human genome or helps you find your car keys. Talk about silly notions.
In case you didn’t know (which I doubt) google has a site dedicated to peer reviews research. There católica stuff there too. Not just the sciences.
You never answered my question. How are we in the image of god and his likeness?
LikeLike
Simple. Our spirit souls.
I’m not mad, in fact you don’t even raise my blood pressure as you are a pussy cat compared to some.
I need not explain to you what you already know. Human consciousness makes no sense without God . . . a creature which asks so many question and contemplates who he is and what his purpose is. If these molecules and such are simply combinations of ‘energy’ (which you equally refuse to explain as it is unexplainable) then why are there not many other species of animals that do just this. Why only 1 species on earth and so far anywhere we’ve been able to explore . . . negating UFO stories of kidnappings and such?
Whether you want a relationship with God or not he wants one with you and he actually has one with you since he is your creator. But this is waste of time as it usually is. Self love leaves little room for anyone else and when they ‘act’ in such a way it is usually for their own self image.
I won’t find God in Science and I don’t rely on God to explain science to me although His fingerprints are everywhere in the cosmos.
LikeLike
I also don’t believe I am my own arbiter, I know I am and have proven it by living the way that I do. I participate only when and if I feel like it. I live a life outside of the prison of western values. Those same values that have you all calling me names for running a few thought your way. I know you wouldn’t understand how this is done, but I only live here. It doesn’t own me.
LikeLike
Nobody called you a name. I am only repeating the few items you related to me and am applying it well known maladies of the psyche and to point out the inconsistencies that you won’t even address.
But I guess this conversation is finished as I see you are getting annoyed and are now simply leading us full circle around and around. It accomplishes nothing.
At my age, I need not waste more time on this but thanks for engaging and I’ll pray for your soul since you have admitted that you are an enabler (or would be if the situation arose) to ending the life of a baby child in the womb of its mother. May God have mercy on your soul.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I never alluded to being an enabler. I only said the views and conditions of each case may warrant it. It may actually be the most compassionate route in some cases. You all did the hypnic jerk and came off topic rambling the Gish gallop. No I didn’t get your blood pressure up. I could, but in all fairness I like some of the ideas after sifting through the anger. You have judged me harshly and poorly. I am on this journey and this is a formative topic for me. If I can’t share my views to validate, contemplate, and conform to a better way through discussion I’ll go elsewhere. I was moved by Phillips reason, but quickly learned you and some others here are just pissy and angry because I don’t believe in god. I don’t share your thoughts about god. So what.
LikeLike