The Science that led me away from Atheism.

[Bugeyedcreepy]

So how does one investigate the spiritual?

With ones heart

...perhaps a demonstration then? or Example?

Love is spiritual

Not really, love is an Emotion.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Yes, you have summarized the issues very succinctly. Atheists generally ignore all of this by assuming materialism. They dismiss any argument referencing anything non-material by claiming "it *is* material". Hard to take it seriously.

Well, perhaps if your definition of spiritual is so vague as to include everything non-material such as mathematics, then I can easy see how you're confused. I'd suggest conferring with your fellow believers on that point because if you stick to that definition, then Science has not only the ability to discover and study the "spiritual", but is already using the "spiritual" via mathematics and writing and emotions, reasoning and cognitive thought, etc. and we can all go home - Job Done!

The scientific method is based on materialism, that all of matter is material, that the universe upon which science investigates is only material, not spiritual.

So how does one investigate the spiritual?

Only one way. The revealed word of God, the Bible.

How do you know the Bible is the revealed word of God? For example, could it be possible that fallible men wrote it, regardless the source of their inspiration?

The scientific method works within the proper domain of science, that being the physical universe. Yes, it requires rational creatures (humans) using mathematics; these (reason, mathematics, and consciousness) are not material but, rather, spiritual. The flaw is in claiming that all that exists is material when there are clearly other things non-material that exist, and; these are required to do science.

If we use your definition of "spiritual" as "non-material stuff", then we not only believe in your version of "spiritual" but use it in our everyday lives, such as Mathematics, emotions, future planning, etc. which all inevitably maps back to the physical universe we live in - that's to say, all these so-called "immaterial" things are generated or manifest in physical things.

I guess the problem would come when you try to claim there's an immaterial,all-powerful mind looking over us and answering our prayers.

I'd suggest you're just sewing confusion by trying to claim everything immaterial as being "spiritual", otherwise we're settled when we do say it is all the result of physical processes.

 

[Sanoy]

so you don't understand it either, therefore it can't be true? Please refer to my assessment of @FormerAtheist 's fallacies, in particular, note all the relevant scientists in all the relevant fields of science not having a problem with it despite coming from the widest background of faiths, or lack thereof....

Rather than putting words in my mouth please refer to my posts on the rest of the thread.

I read your post. The experience of reading it was tremendously different than the self described hype you gave it. If I was the OP I'm not sure I would even bother responding to it.

 

[Ophiolite]

Is pi material or spiritual?

The answer to that depends upon what circles you move in.

 

[Ophiolite]

Love is spiritual

Which love? Agápe, éros, philía, or storgē?

 

[W2L]

Not really, love is an Emotion.

Love is more than an emotion. Its a way of life. We treat others the way we want treated, thats love.

 

[W2L]

Which love? Agápe, éros, philía, or storgē?

Im familiar with agape and philia, which in my opinion are interchangeable, as they are seen in scripture.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Yes, it requires rational creatures (humans) using mathematics; these (reason, mathematics, and consciousness) are not material but, rather, spiritual. The flaw is in claiming that all that exists is material when there are clearly other things non-material that exist, and; these are required to do science.

Scientists don't think math exists?

I suggest you read a few of their journals. I think you will find the hypothesis that scientists use math is verified with p< 0.005.

 

[W2L]

...perhaps a demonstration then? or Example?

To search with our heart means to seek truth inwardly. We look at our own sin for example. What a failure i have been! Thank God He gives me a new heart. No longer will i be selfish.

 

[Jjmcubbin]

Love is more than an emotion. Its a way of life. We treat others the way we want treated, thats love.

Happiness can also be a way of life. Doesn't mean that it is not an emotion.

 

[pitabread]

We treat others the way we want treated, thats love.

Or an evolved survival trait that allows us to function in a co-dependent society.

 

[Ophiolite]

Im familiar with agape and philia, which in my opinion are interchangeable, as they are seen in scripture.

Thank you, but your response is ambiguous and so my question remains, which love are you referring to? You appear to be excluding éros and storgē, but it is not clear. Cheers.

 

[W2L]

Happiness can also be a way of life. Doesn't mean that it is not an emotion.

How is treating others the way you want treated an emotion?

 

[W2L]

Thank you, but your response is ambiguous and so my question remains, which love are you referring to? You appear to be excluding
éros and storgē, but it is not clear. Cheers.

I dont read greek. Ive never heard of storge before now. Show me a scripture that uses that word.

 

[Ophiolite]

I dont read greek. Ive never heard of storge before now.

Well, likewise, I never got past Latin, but when speaking of "love" in a philosophical, or religious sense, the Greek distinctions are often invoked. "Love" is a rather vague concept, with a diverse range of meanings. The Greek words are a useful short hand to make necessary distinctions.
éros: romantic, or sexual love
philía: sometimes, translated as "brotherly love" - a comaradely love for ones fellows.
storgē: love of parents, children, close relatives, arising instinctively.
agápe: a universal, unconditional, all-embracing love.

As you will see, I don't view agápe, or philía as being interchangeable.

I am reasonably sure that all four are not just Greek terms, but terms that arose from the Greek Christian communities, so it may be worth your while to look into them a little more closely.

Love is more than an emotion. Its a way of life. We treat others the way we want treated, thats love

Based on your comments here you appear to be excluding agápe. It is not dependent upon how others treat us. The same would be true, in at least some instance, of storgē. And is sexual love spiritual? Some would likely disagree.

 

[W2L]

Well, likewise, I never got past Latin, but when speaking of "love" in a philosophical, or religious sense, the Greek distinctions are often invoked. "Love" is a rather vague concept, with a diverse range of meanings. The Greek words are a useful short hand to make necessary distinctions.
éros: romantic, or sexual love
philía: sometimes, translated as "brotherly love" - a comaradely love for ones fellows.
storgē: love of parents, children, close relatives, arising instinctively.
agápe: a universal, unconditional, all-embracing love.

As you will see, I don't view agápe, or philía as being interchangeable.

I am reasonably sure that all four are not just Greek terms, but terms that arose from the Greek Christian communities, so it may be worth your while to look into them a little more closely.

Based on your comments here you appear to be excluding agápe. It is not dependent upon how others treat us. The same would be true, in at least some instance, of storgē. And is sexual love spiritual? Some would likely disagree.

Agape and Philia are used interchangeably by different authors of scripture. When teaching the same story, different gospel authors use different words. One may use the word Philia while another may use agape.

 

[HitchSlap]

We treat others the way we want treated, thats love.

And when we don’t?

 

[W2L]

And when we don’t?

Then we are not loving others.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Rather than putting words in my mouth please refer to my posts on the rest of the thread.

I read your post. The experience of reading it was tremendously different than the self described hype you gave it. If I was the OP I'm not sure I would even bother responding to it.

Wait, What?? So not sure what "words" I put in your mouth, but did you or didn't you say...:

There just isn't enough to carry me over the extreme improbability that all existence came about naturally. It's too big of a pill to swallow unless it's medication.

... which is both a stand-alone statement not requiring context, and you literally committing an "Argument from Incredulity" fallacy - comparable to the statement I likened it to - would you disagree?

I do have a habit of mocking beliefs I feel are unfounded, but I believe this is the best way to promote critical analysis of one's belief system and their epistemology in reaching such beliefs. I apologise if it was taken as an insult, but beliefs should be challenged regularly and is a healthy process to undertake, it isn't meant as an insult.

Also, attacking the method of delivery while not addressing the content even just a little, is telling.

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Love is more than an emotion. Its a way of life. We treat others the way we want treated, thats love.

Good philosophy, I guess, but I'd be more inclined to call that fairness and reciprocation - both are great for societal health, no matter what you call it...

Out of curiosity, would that mean you're inclusive of the LBGT Community in all facets of your society? How about women who choose to have an abortion? Medical professionals who perform those procedures?