The Reasons why "Just Following Jesus" Doesn't work

[Rekeisha]

Ah. The long answer is back to argument from ignorance. Thought so.


While there may be dimensions to reality that we don't currently detect or understand, we do have some level of evidence that consciousness of any sort is entirely dependent on the existence of a particular type of matter called brains. If parts of the brain are turned off or destroyed, those parts of the consciousness cease to function properly or at all. Through a singular injury or imbalance, humans can lose the ability to form words, remember faces, retain a sense of identity, or even form new memories at all.


In order to believe that conscious, potent beings could exist in undiscovered dimensions of reality, we'd need to start with at least some evidence that consciousness can exist without brains. As it turns out, all evidence indicates that the phenomenon described as "consciousness" is actually a natural process of brains, so it stands to reason that consciousness is dependent on brains (or at least some form of conventional living matter).


That's not to say that a brainless consciousness does not exist, but until evidence is produced for it there is no reason to believe that one does.

There are a few things in your story you that I see are not consistent with what God has done. Some of the reasons why I say this is first off  people are not robots and we have not been programmed to react to things in a certain way. God does control every situation you are in, but He does not control how you will react in that situation. Secondly, free will isn't a glitch but like most things you can use it for good or evil. Thirdly a robot does not have the same worth as a human being. Lastly, God has no equal so there is no one for Him to answer to So, in your story your robot harmed beings that where superior in worth than it was. So as a result in your story the only recourse would be to deactivate the robot and since you have equals they will have a moral obligation to judge you.
 
As I continue to study the bible I find that a closer story about God's actions would be like you making replicating robots that have the capacity to stay uncorrupted or corrupt themselves. You warn them of the dangers of corruptions but they chose to corrupt themselves. So instead of junking the lot of them, which wouldn't be wrong, you made a fix and made it available to your robots. They just have to come to you to upload the patch in order to reset their system to function properly. You watch and control the level of corruption in the robots and you know at a certain time you are going to junk the robots without the fix and then give a major upgrade to the ones that choose the fix. Since you created them and know their purpose and how they should function you aren't wrong. You made them fully aware of your fix and you even put in their code that you were their owner. This isn't a perfect story but there will never be one that can fully depict what God has and is doing.

Now, you say that he meant to solve the problem by sacrificing a human version of himself to himself, but there are various problems with that. For one thing, it's a fucking human sacrifice, which is barbaric

I see that you seem to hate this idea of Humans sacrifice. So I would like to know do you find that is it wrong to abort a baby? Isn't the woman sacrificing her child so that she can live without the burden of this child? Is it wrong to kill yourself if you are sick and this sickness is going to be painful, costly both emotionally and financially? Like the woman who killed herself when she found out she was going to go through a terminal sickness. Another question I have is, why do you have a problem with human sacrifice? 

For another, if he's really omniscient and omnipotent, this is the most inefficient way to go about solving the problem of sin.

My problem with this objection is the God you are describing is the God of the Bible so you would have to accept that Bible is the world of God. So how do you see him as being inefficient? The only way I can see you making this statement is to be God. I say this because you would have to know why humans are here, what our purpose is, what is wrong with the world and the solution to the problem. How can you know what the most efficient way to fix us would be? Not just that but you would have to know every person's mind, what they need and why. As you have said God is omniscient so he knows the best way to do a thing. If He choose not to do it in a way you think is best, there is a reason for that.

In his knowledge and power, he should have had the option of changing the design of the system before creating it once he foresaw there would be problems with it.

Loving people cost and is risky, and allowing people to love you is also risky and costly. This is the way He chose and this is the right way to do it in order to achieve the outcome He is looking for. 

Here's the problem with that line of logic; regardless of which god you believe in or if you believe in no gods, that still has to mean that a LOT of people have to be wrong for you to be right.

When I was answering the last time I didn't answer you correctly. I was trying to show the parallels of our points of view where a lot of people would be wrong. So yes I agree with you here.

science (unlike religion) is a self-correcting medium. Science is constantly trying to disprove its own findings, and when it does it changes its stance.

Science is knowledge and also a practice of collecting knowledge by using the scientific method. I feel like in a way your are personifying it. Religion (and I agree with this definition of religion as

an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods ) and Science are used by people to meet their own goals. Both can be used for noble reasons and selfish reasons. Also science and religion are not the same because one is self correcting and the other isn't. There are a lot of religions that change with the time to fit the culture they are in. I would say they are different because science is collecting knowledge while religion attempts to shows a person what to do with knowledge, the origin of knowledge and what is the right thing and the wrong thing to do. It is not religion that is wrong or science that is right it is that people are wrong or right. Religion isn't what is wrong with the world (I understand you don't believe that there is a problem with the world) because in your worldview there is no God so all religion has to be made up by men. In my worldview God is all good and man is in rebellion. So it is not religion that is wrong rather people are wrong. 

The whole point of science is to have the most complete and current picture of the truth

I have a few question about this statements. How do you know that the brain has evolved enough to be able to fully understand the universe? As you spoke of above many people can get it wrong. How can you trust your thinking? Also just to get to the foundation of things why does truth matter? Truth matters to me because it is the very nature of God, but in a world without purpose or function why does it matter to you? Lastly, do you think that science can explain everything?

For the Wholly Babble to be true, science would have to be wrong about a LOT of things (not just one). Right now, the generally accepted scientific position on Gaud is that there is no reason to positively believe that any of humanity's gods exist because there is no evidence to show that any of them does exist.

Again I would say that science just collects fact and it is people who get it wrong. Also I would find it hard to disprove God with science. I think the only way you can do science is because there is a God who is keeping everything together and keeping things consistent and predictable. This is no me trying to be snarky but in your worldview without purpose or function I don't see how you could trust that thing will always be the same. Just because it has always happened in the past doesn't mean it always will. Not just that but we are able to interpret the universe. So the question is why? Why are our brains able to take in information from what we observed and then draw conclusion and why does everything stay in order? Not how but why?

Eyewitness testimony, personal experience, and human perception/memory are rated amongst the lowest possible forms of evidence. Why do you suppose that is?

Don't we value scientist's personal experience, eyewitness testimony and perception/memory of a certain experiment ending in a certain way. Everything that we go through is our personal experience. In my worldview I can get revelation from God and if a person's personal experience lines up with the word of God it can be trusted. In your worldview there is no God so you must rely upon a person's testimony and their/ your personal experience. If you are lucky you get to receive an eye witness testimony but mostly you receive it from a filtered source. Now there will be others who are willing to test a scientist's theory but then we would have to trust them on the same grounds. See it is when a large number of people testify to the same thing that an event becomes creditable.

 

1 Corinthians 15 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

 
The bible isn't just a collection of unconnected documents or even for one person. It is a reliable collection of historical documents. There have been over 23,00 archeological dig based on these documents and none have the dig have refuted the bible. They are written by eyewitnesses or from eyewitness account. Just looking at the new testament, these accounts were written during the life time of eye witnesses (not just a few but at least 300 concerning 1 Corinthians). There are 5,600 manuscripts, that include at the least portions of the new testament and the earliest being 120 A.D., 2 decades from the originals. We have less than 12 copies of Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars, which is the only way we know anything about Julius Caesar (which are written 1000 years after the originals). As for Aristotle's Poetics we have less than 10 copies these documents, which tell us what we know about him (having been written 1400 years after the originals). We have no surviving writings of Socrates only those which were written by Plato. The Bible is the most preserved ancient document that we have. It is full of dates names and places with a consistency between new testament documents being 99.5%. If you can't trust the new testament you can't trust a great number of ancient writings. 

Nonsense is always confusing, but confusing things are not always nonsense. Your Bible, however, is nonsense.

Could you please explain why you see men dressed in women's clothes, wool mixed with linen and God's dietary law as arbitrary?

While morality is always subjective, there are objective "oughts" and "ought nots" depending on what an individual's or a society's goals are.  

I don't understand. Would you please explain how this is possible?

If my goal is to cause minimal suffering in myself and others and produce maximum quality of life in myself and others, then there are things that I objectively should do and things I objectively should not do.

How do you define suffering and how do you measure what will produce a quality life?

On a cosmic level, once we die, we're gone and we don't matter.

This is the exact and only reason human life is so precious. Our time is a finite resource, and it stands to reason that we should make the most of it while we're here.

Why does a thing being finite give it worth isn't everything, based on your worldview, finite in the universe? 

We don't have any control over that, and there's nothing we can do about it. What we can do is work to lead positive, fruitful, enjoyable lives that don't infringe on the rights of others.

What is a positive an fruitful life to you?