Although I don't believe this apparently scientists believe life formed on its own

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There was a truly dark age that occurred to the ancient world:

In 1177 B.C., marauding groups known only as the "Sea Peoples" invaded Egypt. The pharaoh's army and navy managed to defeat them, but the victory so weakened Egypt that it soon slid into decline, as did most of the surrounding civilizations. After centuries of brilliance, the civilized world of the Bronze Age came to an abrupt and cataclysmic end. Kingdoms fell like dominoes over the course of just a few decades. No more Minoans or Mycenaeans. No more Trojans, Hittites, or Babylonians. The thriving economy and cultures of the late second millennium B.C., which had stretched from Greece to Egypt and Mesopotamia, suddenly ceased to exist, along with writing systems, technology, and monumental architecture

Amazon.com

Much more profoundly dark than the early middle ages.

Oh the Bronze Age Collapse is an astronomically impressive and amazing thing that truly does deserve the name of 'the Dark Age' for sure. I've seen a few videos about it on YouTube and it's amazing how little there is to concretely say what caused it.

 

[stevevw]

Like many Western Christians, I used to believe in an immaterial soul. But, a fair bit of research, including learning a little history, has led to me changing my mind. I do not believe that the scriptures teach the existence of an immaterial soul and I believe that mind body dualism is not a tenable Christian position.

I am not sure what this means. Are you saying that our present state is our heavenly state. Or maybe whatever it is that we sense as consciousness and self is what lives on. Whatever that is.

 

[stevevw]

They were Dark Ages only over most of Christian Europe. Eastern Christianity retained civilization long after the West went Dark. And even then, Irish Monks kept learning alive in small enclaves. It was never total. And the Church remained in the West.

Yes and I don't think Dark Ages is the right term. More like the Early Middle Ages.

It seems after the fall of the Roman Empire this left a vacumn and there was a long period of chopping and changing tribes and Kingdoms. Which went on to establish the nations we have today. It also did not help that most people were illiterate.

So its understandable that little record keeping or unified administration was established during this time. But noticeable is that Christian still grew and in fact there were periods where the leaders maintain Christian rule in many ways.

But then came the Muslim Caliphates when changed things again.

 

[stevevw]

I found this article on the Christian perspective on Mind and Body Dualism which is quiet interesting. It also covers materialism in comparison.

Mind and Consciousness

Because of the historical prominence of some form of soul-body dualism in Christian thought about human nature – and because critics of Christian theology in recent philosophy link the credibility of theism with the plausibility of dualism – this article investigates the cogency of dualism and its ostensible link with theism.

Sections include an overview of Christian theological anthropology; a depiction of the hostility toward mind and consciousness in modern philosophy; the combined critique and the recent resurgence of dualism and Christian theism; theological objections to dualism; and mind and consciousness in Christian theology without dualism, including Christian forms of agnosticism, hylomorphism, materialism, idealism, and panpsychism.

Mind and Consciousness

www.saet.ac.uk

 

[Hans Blaster]

I found this article on the Christian perspective on Mind and Body Dualism whic h is quiet interesting. It also covers materialism in comparison.

Mind and Consciousness

Because of the historical prominence of some form of soul-body dualism in Christian thought about human nature – and because critics of Christian theology in recent philosophy link the credibility of theism with the plausibility of dualism – this article investigates the cogency of dualism and its ostensible link with theism.

Sections include an overview of Christian theological anthropology; a depiction of the hostility toward mind and consciousness in modern philosophy; the combined critique and the recent resurgence of dualism and Christian theism; theological objections to dualism; and mind and consciousness in Christian theology without dualism, including Christian forms of agnosticism, hylomorphism, materialism, idealism, and panpsychism.

Mind and Consciousness

www.saet.ac.uk

You really can't help yourself, can you?

Could we stick to the origin of life, please?

 

[The Barbarian]

So its understandable that little record keeping or unified administration was established during this time. But noticeable is that Christian still grew and in fact there were periods where the leaders maintain Christian rule in many ways.

Christianity grew strong and vigorous without the help of government or academia. Learning and governments collapsed, but the Church did not. If the gates of Hell cannot stand against it, the collapse of a human empire certainly would not.

Oh the Bronze Age Collapse is an astronomically impressive and amazing thing that truly does deserve the name of 'the Dark Age' for sure. I've seen a few videos about it on YouTube and it's amazing how little there is to concretely say what caused it.

Seems to have been a coincidence of political strife, climate change, (with consequent movement of peoples like the Dorians, Sea Peoples, and herding tribes from Central Asia, and religous issues. But no one really knows.

 

[stevevw]

You really can't help yourself, can you?

Could we stick to the origin of life, please?

Here is the thing from my perspective and I would say from other Christians or those who are open to something beyond the material world.

It directly relates to the idea that life did not form on its own.

The OP mentions that they don't believe life formed on its own as scientists claim. What does that mean. Surely this implies a creator. Therefore a soul and life beyond the material world.

The same metaphysics that support the idea that life was created and not the result of physical naturalism. Is the same metaphysics as there being a soul or conscious self that lives on. Created beings that will go on beyond the material world.

The OP poses a disagreement and claim about metaphysics. Whether life came about on its own through materialism with no creator required. Or there was a creator as life is not able to come about without a creator involved.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes and I don't think Dark Ages is the right term. More like the Early Middle Ages.

It seems after the fall of the Roman Empire this left a vacumn and there was a long period of chopping and changing tribes and Kingdoms. Which went on to establish the nations we have today. It also did not help that most people were illiterate.

So its understandable that little record keeping or unified administration was established during this time. But noticeable is that Christian still grew and in fact there were periods where the leaders maintain Christian rule in many ways.

But then came the Muslim Caliphates when changed things again.

... buddy, that's the commonly accepted view of what happened. That's not something amazing and groundbreaking.

 

[stevevw]

... buddy, that's the commonly accepted view of what happened. That's not something amazing and groundbreaking.

It is when it dispells the idea of the Dark Ages being some period where little happened as far as Christian beliefs. Its only from an intellectual worldview that people attribute this period as dark. But Christianity was alive and growing and they knew all along about life not coming about on its own.

This has been an intrinsic truth of Christianity from the beginning as far as western thought.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It is when it dispells the idea of the Dark Ages being some period where little happened as far as Christian beliefs. Its only from an intellectual worldview that people attribute this period as dark. But Christianity was alive and growing and they knew all along about life not coming about on its own.

This has been an intrinsic truth of Christianity from the beginning as far as western thought.

... again, that's not a groundbreaking or amazing statement. That is what is known in the actual historical scholarly circles. Even an amateur historian would know that the Dark Ages were not as dark as people make them out to be.

 

[stevevw]

Christianity grew strong and vigorous without the help of government or academia. Learning and governments collapsed, but the Church did not. If the gates of Hell cannot stand against it, the collapse of a human empire certainly would not.

Yes and a big part of that was the church was not of this world.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes and a big part of that was the church was not of this world.

But it was though. To try and say it wasn't ignores the actual people who were a part of the church, who believed in Christ and did the actual work to bring people into the fold.

 

[stevevw]

... again, that's not a groundbreaking or amazing statement. That is what is known in the actual historical scholarly circles. Even an amateur historian would know that the Dark Ages were not as dark as people make them out to be.

Ok now we have established that what about the point that Christian worldview or metaphysics has always believed in life not coming about on its own.

This is a fundemental and opposing belief that life came by its own accord. I am assuming by a naturalistic cause and opposed to a supernatural one.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Ok now we have established that what about the point that Christian worldview or metaphysics has always believed in life not coming about on its own.

This is a fundemental and opposing belief that life came by its own accord. I am assuming by a naturalistic cause and opposed to a supernatural one.

We don't know how life came into being. That's the rub though. Any proposed hypothesis about life coming being are just that: hypothesis. We just don't know for certain. Could be natural, could be supernatural, could be extraterrestrial. We don't know.

 

[stevevw]

But it was though. To try and say it wasn't ignores the actual people who were a part of the church, who believed in Christ and did the actual work to bring people into the fold.

I am not sure what you are arguing against lol. I think we probably agree but our wires are crossed. The original point was whether the idea of the 'Mind and Body divide was something brought in by later Hellinistic and Westernised thought. Or it was already an idea the Christian worldview supported.

Linking this back to the OP the Christian worldview is an example of people having a different metaphysical belief about how life came about. As opposed to the scientists who believe life was formed on its own.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I am not sure what you are arguing against lol. I think we probably agree but our wires are crossed. The original point was whether the idea of the 'Mind and Body divide was something brought in by later Hellinistic and Westernised thought. Or it was already an idea the Christian worldview supported.

Which is off-topic and I was just commenting on the misconceptions about the Early Middle Ages that persist from both sides of the camp.

Linking this back to the OP the Christian worldview is an example of people having a different metaphysical belief about how life came about. As opposed to the scientists who believe life was formed on its own.

It's not really metaphysical. It's just one side having a solely religious view on the matter and one side having a solely naturalistic view on the matter. Calling it 'metaphysical' is just obfuscation from you using philosophical terms, not scientific ones.

 

[stevevw]

We don't know how life came into being. That's the rub though. Any proposed hypothesis about life coming being are just that: hypothesis. We just don't know for certain. Could be natural, could be supernatural, could be extraterrestrial. We don't know.

I agree. That is why I was trying to explain and establish that this is really about a metaphysical belief.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I agree. That is why I was trying to explain and establish that this is really about a metaphysical belief.

It's not metaphysical! You keep using that word and you clearly do not know what it means!

 

[stevevw]

Which is off-topic and I was just commenting on the misconceptions about the Early Middle Ages that persist from both sides of the camp.

The problem is when you jumpo into another persons post you may not understand the context. I was responding to someone else bring up this point. Can't remember exactly how we got to that. I think it was something to do with the idea of the Mind/Body divide and where it originated.

This was in relation to whether the Mind/Body divide is real in whatever form it may take. Which was related to whether life was created or came about on its own.

It's not really metaphysical. It's just one side having a solely religious view on the matter and one side having a solely naturalistic view on the matter. Calling it 'metaphysical' is just obfuscation from you using philosophical terms, not scientific ones.

If one side is taking a religious worldview. I assume the belief that life was created. But the other side is taking a naturalistic view that uses material science.

Are you saying that the religious group must conform to the epistemics of the naturalistic group in how we should understand this issue. If material science cannot disprove Gods creation. Then what is the use of science. It will never convince those who believe in Gods creation.

This is what I mean by its really about a metaphysical belief on both sides. Because like you said we don't know. Science will never be able to prove there is no creator God that brought about life.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

If one side is taking a religious worldview. I assume the belief that life was created. But the other side is taking a naturalistic view that uses material science.

Are you saying that the religious group must conform to the epistemics of the naturalistic group in how we should understand this issue. If material science cannot disprove Gods creation. Then what is the use of science. It will never convince those who believe in Gods creation.

This is what I mean by its really about a metaphysical belief on both sides. Because like you said we don't know. Science will never be able to prove there is no creator God that brought about life.

If the religious group wants to try and use science to back up their claims, then yes, they need to use the epistemic rules of the naturalistic group since science ONLY deals with the natural world, not the supernatural. Which obviously will not suit the religious group since their viewpoint on the origin of life is a de facto supernatural cause.

And it's only a metaphysical belief on the religious side of the debate since it talks about stuff BEYOND the physical, the supernatural. 100% science will be able to prove there is no creator God because that is not something science deals with. Science ONLY deals with the natural world.