My Blade Runner Challenge

[juvenissun]

Except new human come about from reproduction and we can't see God doing that.

Yes, God is still doing it.
More precisely, God has done that from the beginning.

An advice to you is not to continue on this. The rest would be theological and you are not ready for that. (that means, you are not able to ask the right question from here on)

 

[juvenissun]

I would say that a replicant would deserve a measure of dignity because it would be created in the image of man, and derivatively bear the image of God inasmuch as it resembles a human being. It would be dehumanizing to treat them poorly.

I agree with you on what you said except the highlighted.
Even a human clone would only have the physical image of God. No more than that. What would you call "a man without a soul"?

Zombie.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, God is still doing it.
More precisely, God has done that from the beginning.

An advice to you is not to continue on this. The rest would be theological and you are not ready for that. (that means, you are not able to ask the right question from here on)

I'm not trying to engage in a theological debate. But all your descriptions of what God does and what happens against God's will are purely from your intuition... not from scripture.

I may not agree with scripture, but I can accept it as a consistent south of information, "What Juvenissun thinks" is still not scripture.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm not trying to engage in a theological debate. But all your descriptions of what God does and what happens against God's will are purely from your intuition... not from scripture.

I may not agree with scripture, but I can accept it as a consistent south of information, "What Juvenissun thinks" is still not scripture.

Confucius said: if one is shown a leg of a table and does not have any idea on how the other three legs look like, then this person is unteachable.

Of course, you still can argue a lot about this teaching if you like to be a "difficult person".

 

[Shemjaza]

Confucius said: if one is shown a leg of a table and does not have any idea on how the other three legs look like, then this person is unteachable.

Of course, you still can argue a lot about this teaching if you like to be a "difficult person".

Arrogance masquerading as profundity. You have no consistent reasoning to back up your assertions.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I knew someone would say this.

You predicted your own argument's failure... shortly after everyone else did.

This argument won't work.

It already has.

However, you did touch a hidden problem in this issue. That's why I said this issue is theologically more complicate than it appears, and need to get into the issue of soul.

So stop yammering and get into it, already.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Christianity is more clear on this issue than any other religion.
God creates human. This is so defined in the first book of the Bible.
God creates everything. Logically, it means human can not create human.

Hmm, I'm not following that logic.

God creates human → human can not create human.
God creates everything → human can not create anything. No?

 

[juvenissun]

Hmm, I'm not following that logic.

God creates human → human can not create human.
God creates everything → human can not create anything. No?

No. Human can not "create" anything.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No. Human can not "create" anything.

Okay. By what definition of the word are you using for 'create'?

 

[juvenissun]

Okay. By what definition of the word are you using for 'create'?

Do not know the definition. But examples are illustrated in Gen. 1

 

[TLK Valentine]

Do not know the definition. But examples are illustrated in Gen. 1

If you have no definitions, then what are you babbling about?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Do not know the definition. But examples are illustrated in Gen. 1

Then why, if you don't know what definition of 'create' you're using, are you arguing that humans can't make things?

Or do you mean the definition of create in Genesis 1 of God creating things from nothing? Because if you meant that, then you should have just darn well said so, since humans do create things all the time. It's creating things from nothing that we can't do. Yet.

 

[Herman Hedning]

It's creating things from nothing that we can't do. Yet.

Creating things from nothing would break the laws of thermodynamics - even for a god. But we have already created antimatter from pure energy, specifically atoms of anti-hydrogen. That is pretty close to creation from nothing.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Creating things from nothing would break the laws of thermodynamics - even for a god. But we have already created antimatter from pure energy, specifically atoms of anti-hydrogen. That is pretty close to creation from nothing.

It was a joke.

 

[AV1611VET]

Creating things from nothing would break the laws of thermodynamics - even for a god.

Which came first, the earth or thermodynamics?

Did the creation of the moon raise the amount of mass/energy in the universe accordingly?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Which came first, the earth or thermodynamics?

Thermodynamics, of course.

Did the creation of the moon raise the amount of mass/energy in the universe accordingly?

Of course not -- it was formed from existing materials.

 

[juvenissun]

If you have no definitions, then what are you babbling about?

I gave my definition.

 

[juvenissun]

Then why, if you don't know what definition of 'create' you're using, are you arguing that humans can't make things?

Or do you mean the definition of create in Genesis 1 of God creating things from nothing? Because if you meant that, then you should have just darn well said so, since humans do create things all the time. It's creating things from nothing that we can't do. Yet.

I like to say that. But the Creation described in Gen. 1 is more than that.
Human "makes" things, not creates things.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I like to say that. But the Creation described in Gen. 1 is more than that.
Human "makes" things, not creates things.

Again, what definition of 'create' are you using? People create and make things all the time.

 

[Shemjaza]

I gave my definition.

You can say "A plumbus is a neatly cromulent gromble," but that doesn't actually pass any useful information to whoever you are speaking to, because the terms you are using haven't been clearly defined.