Question for Atheists

actsfourthirty said:

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

Click to expand...

A combination of sperm and ovum resulting in a human being???? So, quite obviously being physical.

If you think a two-year-old is the same as a 15-year-old, and the same as a 30-year-old, and is the same as a 60-year-old, then you need to live a little longer.

stvdv said:

Brahman created the Universe

Click to expand...

Why? A bored Sunday afternoon?

Trailblazer said:

That is how God set it up. The soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem.

There is no physical evidence because the soul is not physical. It can only be seen through its signs and works.

Click to expand...

And those 'signs and works' would be physical? and evidence for the soul?

You can believe that if you want to, but you will find out differently after you die and are not dead.

Click to expand...

Perhaps. Much more likely, not.

lewisnotmiller said:

If I can be serious for a moment...and who knows if that is actually possible...why did you need to flip to 'atheist' mode for that explanation? I found it pretty interested, fwiw, just trying to get a handle on how you're seeing that as a non-transtheist position or explanation.

Click to expand...

The thread title would have precluded my responding to the OP had I not made the flip, and I was compelled to refute the premise in the OP that the "person" was immutable.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Why? A bored Sunday afternoon?

Click to expand...

Tuesday.

actsfourthirty said:

See what I mean atheism is flawed coz it’s based on human reason and human reason is part of fallen human nature!
Be patient I’ll answer all your concerns

Click to expand...

But you will have to do it without using human reasoning.

Trailblazer said:

It might look that way, but looks can be deceiving.

Ubetcha, since it is the soul that directs the physical body.

Click to expand...

Proof? Evidence? Anything other than a bald assertion?

What I believe might not be factual, but that does not mean it is not true. It could be either true or false, logically speaking.

Click to expand...

True=factual. They are the same thing.

If you want to gamble on that it's your call.

Click to expand...

It's just as much of a gamble to deny the Loch Ness monster, gremlins in my garden, or dragons.

You'll find out when you die. See you there, I hope.....
There had just better be some atheists up there because otherwise heaven would be as boring as hell.

Click to expand...

I guess there is no way you can be surprised if you are wrong.

Trailblazer said:

There is no physical evidence because the soul is not physical. It can only be seen through its signs and works.

Click to expand...

Then by all means give examples of these 'signs and works' that show a soul exists. I assume these 'signs and works' cannot easily be explained by any other means, right?

This is a fallacy. Deductive reasoning I believe they call it.

actsfourthirty said:

Your person is not physical, not sense perceptible, therefore not physical, so there must be some non-physical reality, or spiritual reality! A supernatural reality, superior to physical nature, with intellect and will.

Click to expand...

"Must" be?

How did you logically make the two associations that isn't based on hope or wishful thinking?

actsfourthirty said:

What is the origin of your person, it is not physical so it does not result from physical natural conception, at one time you did not exist, now you do exist, the only logical conclusion is????

Click to expand...

If person you mean soul, how do you know that we have a soul?

Saying what you believe is one thing, but when you draw a conclusion based on that belief, you'd have to explain how you came to that conclusion so others will see your line of thinking.

actsfourthirty said:

the only logical conclusion is you were created therefore there is a creator

Click to expand...

Logical?

Sounds like drawing conclusions on wishful thinking and assumptions.

Which isn't bad in itself-that's what belief and faith is in easier terms-so logical wouldn't be appropriate in my opinion.

Evangelicalhumanist said:

Why? A bored Sunday afternoon?

Click to expand...

I don't think so, but better ask Brahman if you want to know

actsfourthirty said:

thanks

only cos you can’t answer

the only logical conclusion is you were created therefore there is a creator

Click to expand...

Mum and dad?

actsfourthirty said:

the only logical conclusion is you were created therefore there is a creator

Click to expand...

Ooops, tricked again. I honestly thought that the OP was a genuine question from someone who honestly wanted to know an atheist's perspective on a given topic. Turns out it's a bait question to engage in debate against an atheist because you've already made your mind up what an atheist thinks.

actsfourthirty said:

Science proves man is a hybrid, body and person.

Click to expand...

The definition of Person is "Human Being". I am, and always will be, "Human Being". I will always be THIS "Human Being". This is known as the "Law of Identity"; one of the "Laws of Logic". The definition of "Body" is "Physical structure of a person". I am a person, thus i must have a physical structure to exist, thus I have a body. That body is biological and follows the laws of biology, chemistry, physics, etc.

I fail to see how possess the body that I must possess in order to be a person makes me a "hybrid".

actsfourthirty said:

According to the scientific law of change,

Click to expand...

What law are you referring to? The best I can come up with is a book -- The Laws of Scientific Change | Hakob Barseghyan | Springer -- that seems to talk about changes in the scientific method but doesn't seem to talk about a "scientific law of change". The best i can come up with in my head is the law of entropy which you may be referring to; but please advise us on what you are referring to in regards to some scientific "law of change".

actsfourthirty said:

man is a hybrid body and person

Click to expand...

I fail to see how possess the body that I must possess in order to be a person makes me a "hybrid".

actsfourthirty said:

body changes all through life, but the person does not change,

Click to expand...

I disagree. My identity does not change. But as I age, gain new experiences, undergo entropy, go through biological changes, obtain new knowledge, then I certainly "change".

actsfourthirty said:

you are always the same person

Click to expand...

In that i possess the same identity; yes.
In that this object does not change; no.

actsfourthirty said:

What is the origin of your body, it is according to science the result of natural conception.

Click to expand...

I think this was covered in Junior High school. I think it was called "sex ed".

actsfourthirty said:

Your person is not physical

Click to expand...

I'm not physical? I am a materialist; so I believe that my "person" is wholly and totally physical. My "personhood" as to who I am as a human being; my conciousness, thoughts, beliefs, etc. are more explainable by the formation and alterations of neuropathways than a mystical "force". Thus, from my perspective, this sentence is gibberish.

Sorry it took so long, hope this helps

You CANNOT have one entity that changes and does not change, that’s impossible.
So man is a hybrid body and soul (person)
How are they united? God only knows, but in Him we live gen 2:7 and move and have our being. What is the source of your soul or person, it’s not physical so it must be spiritual (what else is there) so what is the origin story of you’re soul or person?

Not possible to believe that there is no God, you can only believe in something or someone that exists. You cannot explain or describe non-existence, or know it’s properties or characteristics.


Fallen human nature:

Basic definition

Mans lower carnal passions are not subject to the higher intellect and will.
Self-interest self-will
We are prone to sin, and cannot love God or act in an altruistic manner, in fact without God’s help (grace) we cannot even have one good thought!

Vices or deadly sins need to be countered with the virtues
Especially pride with humility

Man is fallen or defective
Mans reason is affected and defective
Freethinkers are fuzzy thinkers

1st effect suffering and death
Immediately after the fall, by the sweat of your brow shall you bring forth bread, Christ (God become man) worked and blessed work making it holy. You birth pangs shall be increased. It is appointed once for man to die, then the judgement.

Another defect is that most Atheist’s are irrational, and Intellectually dishonest, to evade the divine moral law is the whole reason for atheism, if there is no God there is no moral law giver and no moral law, the theory evolution is just tool to that end and the end justifies the means.

If there are a no God, then all things are permissible!

Mock Turtle said:

A combination of sperm and ovum resulting in a human being???? So, quite obviously being physical.

If you think a two-year-old is the same as a 15-year-old, and the same as a 30-year-old, and is the same as a 60-year-old, then you need to live a little longer.

Click to expand...

body does change but you do not and will not

actsfourthirty said:

You CANNOT have one entity that changes and does not change, that’s impossible.

Click to expand...

I mentioned above the "Law of Identity".

One of the three laws of Logic.

Yes, it is impossible to have an entity that changes and does not change. This is why it is important that we know, understand, assign characteristics in defining the "identity" of a given "object". There is no rule in the identity of "human being" that says "unchangeable". Thus, as we do not (or should not) apply the characteristic of "Unchangeable" to the "object" of "human being", which obviously changes. True characteristics of precise definitions or characteristics to "Person" includes

• Changeable
• Fallible
• Impressionable
• Etc

So you are applying a characteristic to the object called "person"; that characteristic called "Unchanging"; thus violating the laws of logic; then claiming that you have reached a logical conclusion.

NOW, let's apply that same principle to the Christian deity.

Hebrews 13:8 is one of many scriptures that says that God is unchanging. Yet there are many times in the bible that the characteristic of changing his opinion: Numbers 14 and Genesis 6:6

So in your own words,

actsfourthirty said:

You CANNOT have one entity that changes and does not change, that’s impossible.

Click to expand...

Please share your beliefs
More to come

actsfourthirty said:

Sorry it took so long, hope this helps

You CANNOT have one entity that changes and does not change, that’s impossible.
So man is a hybrid body and soul (person)
How are they united? God only knows, but in Him we live gen 2:7 and move and have our being. What is the source of your soul or person, it’s not physical so it must be spiritual (what else is there) so what is the origin story of you’re soul or person?

Click to expand...

We can see and measure the body. What tangible evidence do you have for a soul -- or for this god, for that matter?

What is the origin story, in your opinion? (please show your work).
"Origin" is ambiguous. Do you mean conception, embryology and birth, or are you taking about abiogenesis or magic poofing?

Soul origin? Again, first you need to establish that there is a soul, then you need to describe the mechanisms involved in this 'origin' and show your supporting evidence. Can you do that?

Not possible to believe that there is no God, you can only believe in something or someone that exists. You cannot explain or describe non-existence, or know it’s properties or characteristics.

Click to expand...

Why is it not possible to believe there is no god, and why would you expect anyone to describe what doesn't exist?

Mans lower carnal passions are not subject to the higher intellect and will.
Self-interest self-will
We are prone to sin, and cannot love God or act in an altruistic manner, in fact without God’s help (grace) we cannot even have one good thought!

Click to expand...

Huh? You're making baseless assertions, again. "Sin?" "God?" We know you believe this, but you haven't justified your belief. It's not based on evidence, it's faith-based religious doctrine

Vices or deadly sins need to be countered with the virtues
Especially pride with humility

Man is fallen or defective
Mans reason is affected and defective
Freethinkers are fuzzy thinkers

Click to expand...

You're preaching. Your thinking is not evidence-based or logical. It's religious indoctrination.
Freethinkers are actual thinkers.

1st effect suffering and death
Immediately after the fall, by the sweat of your brow shall you bring forth bread, Christ (God become man) worked and blessed work making it holy. You birth pangs shall be increased. It is appointed once for man to die, then the judgement.

Another defect is that most Atheist’s are irrational, and Intellectually dishonest, to evade the divine moral law is the whole reason for atheism, if there is no God there is no moral law giver and no moral law,

Click to expand...

But it's you who is being irrational. You're preaching unsupported, faith-based religious doctrine. Theism is based on NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

Atheism is based on reason and logic. It's a rational conclusion based on the fact that there is no real evidence for theism. It's not an attempt to evade anything.

Morality? For the religious, doctrine can be a moral crutch. Their morality is often based on divine command, not consequences or utility. They're like little children, submitting to the authority of a strong father, unable to morally discriminate on their own.

As actsfourthirty pointed out
It's the non religious who develop an internalized moral code, based on consequences and utility. They need no moral crutches; no rule book. They stand morally upright, all on their own.

the theory evolution is just tool to that end and the end justifies the means.

Click to expand...

You clearly have no understanding of the ToE at all. It has nothing to do with morality. "End justifies means?" Where'd you get that?
The ToE's an explanation of the mechanism of biological change. Nothing more.

If there are a no God, then all things are permissible!

Click to expand...

Clear evidence of no internalized morality and an inability to make independent moral decisions without referring to a rule book. Such religious are, thus, moral imbeciles. Unlike atheists, they're unable to make independent moral choices. All morality is based on an ancient rule book.

Two can play at this game....

Please share it’s a two way street although no reply is required

Pride and self-interest proves fallen human nature, reason is defective: requiring divine revelation and Christian virtues

It was the church that created western civilization, pagan religion was barbaric.

Pagan barbarism is a result of fallen human nature corrected by the Christian culivilization, Grace, and virtues.

how many times have scientific theories been updated and corrected? (Almost always) Most of what’s called science is not even science but a faith based theory system.

just read the paper or science journal almost always
Scientists now believe......

Real science is done in a lab and is repeatable


The heavens declare the glory of God, why? They are ordered they had be an orderer or Creator, creating and ordering the laws of nature.

Justice, truth, and morals require the divine

Religion invented science, most scientist of the 1700’s to the 20th century were religious men, many priests, the oldest observatories or daily recorded weather staitions are located at monasteries, Louie Pasture etc. and the originator of the Big Bang theory was a priest!

Fake science and evolution as a means of avoiding the eternal moral law, the purpose atheism is to avoid the moral law, eliminate the moral law giver and you eliminate the moral law, evolution is used as a tool to do this, piltdown man and peeking man were missing link frauds perpetrated by Teilhard de Chardin a apostate priest and called science.

Again science is infallible!

Scientists now believe.................

Be precise there is a big difference in terms leading to misunderstandings

I love to fry fish my family and friends don’t fry your family and friends!
Punctuation matters

Hyper-critical people R whey 2 picky!

But Charity covers a multitude of sins!

NewGuyOnTheBlock said:

The definition of Person is "Human Being".

Click to expand...

I disagree.
If LGM landed in a flying saucer and asked you to 'take them to your leader', would you not consider them persons?

As space aliens, they're more unrelated to humans than humans are to bacteria, yet most people would afford them the moral consideration of an actual human. Therefore -- moral consideration, de facto, is not based on species, but on some other qualities.
What are these qualities?