Is there evidence of something beyond nature?

[paul becke]

Watch this brilliant video, with John Lennox giving a hilarious account of an exchange he had with a world famous chemist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6rd4HEdffw

 

[Shemjaza]

Watch this brilliant video, with John Lennox giving a hilarious account of an exchange he had with a world famous chemist.

Couldn't you just as easily postulate that reaction to visual cues triggers mind states in the physical structure of the viewers brain?

I'm not saying I have absolute evidence for this, but it seems silly to state that a immaterial explanation is the only option.


EDIT: Also, it helps prevent the screen being distorted if you remove the s from https://

 

[paul becke]

Couldn't you just as easily postulate that reaction to visual cues triggers mind states in the physical structure of the viewers brain?

I'm not saying I have absolute evidence for this, but it seems silly to state that a immaterial explanation is the only option.


EDIT: Also, it helps prevent the screen being distorted if you remove the s from https://

Even with an explanation of the mechanisms involved in your scenario, it sounds incoherent and fails to address the issue.

I don't check the address lines of links I transcribe. I just copy them. You have to be economical about what information you direct your attention to. For the same reason, I don't read a user manual to memorize it. It's better not to clutter up your mind with relatively inconsequential things.

 

[Smidlee]

I watched it and have deduced that some people can be talked into believing anything.

Except language , code, information is not something we are taught to believe. It's come naturally even at birth. Thus it's human instinct just like a bird flying south for the winter.

 

[Smidlee]

What instincts do we have other than animal instincts?

Instincts are "build-in" behaviors and knowledge that man has yet to come up with an explanation for... at least in the materialistic sense.

 

[Smidlee]

Yes 'built in' animal instincts inherited from our long lost ancestors.
.

I don't share in your faith and I believe there is enough evidence now to show it's not as simple to chance from one creature to another as they used to think.

Also which genes gives us the ability of language? The smarter chimps doesn't have anywhere near the ability to learn language as a 5 month baby does.

When we perceive a significant threat to us, then our bodies get ready either for a fight to the death or a desperate flight from certain defeat by a clearly superior adversary.

When we are really afraid we sometimes freeze rigid.

When we are cold we instinctively shake to try and keep warm.
We sweat to stay cool.

We also are able to commit suicide which goes against those instincts.

 

[Smidlee]

You can say what you like but we are animals just like all the other animals on this planet.
You dreaming about a magic being looking out for you means less than nothing in reality, we are all going to die.

I don't believe in any magic being no more than we are magical by creating computers, cars, planes, etc.
We obviously don't share the same faith. I clearly disagree we are like any other animals. If you really believe that then you wouldn't have any problem with rape, murder ,etc.

 

[Split Rock]

Watch this brilliant video, with John Lennox giving a hilarious account of an exchange he had with a world famous chemist:

He's a funny guy and a very good speaker. I like him.

However, he is wrong that our DNA is in "exactly the right order." Exactly right for what? To function? No. There are many different orders it could be in and still function correctly. In fact, humans don't have a specific "exactly right" order for our DNA at all.

I also don't find his arguemnt at the end very convincing. How does he go from "we are not only containers of text to writers of text" to transendence beyond nature? That is a non sequiter.

 

[Split Rock]

I don't believe in any magic being no more than we are magical by creating computers, cars, planes, etc.
We obviously don't share the same faith. I clearly disagree we are like any other animals. If you really believe that then you wouldn't have any problem with rape, murder ,etc.

We are social animals. This is why we have rules and morals. Other social animals also have rules they follow, and they even be said to have morals as well.

 

[Smidlee]

We are social animals. This is why we have rules and morals. Other social animals also have rules they follow, and they even be said to have morals as well.

Often the morals we claim animals have are our interpretation of an animal's behavior. (This would included rape., murder, etc.)

 

[bhsmte]

He's a funny guy and a very good speaker. I like him.

However, he is wrong that our DNA is in "exactly the right order." Exactly right for what? To function? No. There are many different orders it could be in and still function correctly. In fact, humans don't have a specific "exactly right" order for our DNA at all.

I also don't find his arguemnt at the end very convincing. How does he go from "we are not only containers of text to writers of text" to transendence beyond nature? That is a non sequiter.

I always liked Lennox too. He seems like a good guy, a grandpa type and is a good speaker.

His expertise on DNA though, as a mathematician, would not be up to par, with someone like a Francis Collins, who is a physician and former head of the human genome project and he would disagree with Lennox, completely.

 

[juvenissun]

Watch this brilliant video, with John Lennox giving a hilarious account of an exchange he had with a world

If a dog is natural, are you also only natural? Or are you more than natural?

 

[juvenissun]

We are social animals. This is why we have rules and morals. Other social animals also have rules they follow, and they even be said to have morals as well.

If that is natural then we can certainly be unnatural. We can break rules and we can be immoral.

 

[Smidlee]

This is the damage creationism can do to a brain and they claim it's not child abuse.
Engineered ignorance to accommodate creationism is a blight on the US of A.

While I wouldn't claim naturalism is child abuse (that seems a little extreme) but I do think creation and Christianity fit better to reality than naturalism. I'm strongly against anyone trying to accuse someone of child abuse (or any kind of abuse) without strong evidence to back it up.

Naturalism: Bumping into Reality - Greg Koukl - YouTube

 

[Dizredux]

While I wouldn't claim naturalism is child abuse (that seems a little extreme) but I do think creation and Christianity fit better to reality than naturalism. I'm strongly against anyone trying to accuse someone of child abuse (or any kind of abuse) without strong evidence to back it up.

Having worked with child abuse victims, I very much agree with this. Once you have seen real child abuse, trying to frame something like teaching religion or naturalism as child abuse is just plain foolishness in my opinion.

Dizredux

 

[Dizredux]

Engineered ignorance to accommodate creationism is a blight on the US and should be seen as a form of child abuse.

I take it you have never been exposed to real child abuse but it is not a good thing to trivialize in this way. It might be useful for you to find some other descriptors lest people consider you a jerk and I truly hope that is not the case.

Dizredux

 

[Shemjaza]

Even with an explanation of the mechanisms involved in your scenario, it sounds incoherent and fails to address the issue.

We don't know in detail how the brain works, however we have a lot of evidence that we can distort modify and create thoughts via very materialistic things like surgery and drugs.

This is evidence of the material aspect ideas.

Could you please point out how proposing material thoughts doesn't address the issue? And please point out where I was incoherent, I'd love to correct my error.

I don't check the address lines of links I transcribe. I just copy them. You have to be economical about what information you direct your attention to. For the same reason, I don't read a user manual to memorize it. It's better not to clutter up your mind with relatively inconsequential things.

I was commenting that fixing the address would fix the distorted page. I thought it was common courtesy.

 

[Dizredux]

I am not trivializing it but child abuse comes in many forms both physical and mental and deliberately retarding a child's mind in order for it to believe in a myth can well be considered child abuse.

I am not going to argue with you but you have no idea what actual child abuse is.

The next time you see someone teaching their child religion, you might call Child Protective Services or whatever they call them where you live and see what kind of reaction you get.

You are just being extreme but that appears to be what you want.

Dizredux

 

[bhsmte]

I am not trivializing it but child abuse comes in many forms both physical and mental and deliberately retarding a child's mind in order for it to believe in a myth can well be considered child abuse.

The vast majority of parents who teach kids about religion are not even close to child abuse. Now, if the religious belief they teach, is one that promotes harming others, or treating people who don't believe what they do poorly, than that may be a different story.

Religious faith is right for some people and it makes them a better person. For some, it doesn't.

 

[jacks]

Great video. It is always instructive to talk to a scientist with an open mind. They have wonderful, fascinating information and then admit when they have reached the limits of their knowledge.