The Impossible

[CabVet]

OK. So, per the article I posted, it seems people could investigate preventing that break down. Might it not be that we don't have the technology yet rather than a certifiable impossibility?

If we can prevent the break down, we are preventing death, not resurrecting anything. The impossibility is resurrection after the break down.

 

[Resha Caner]

If we can prevent the break down, we are preventing death, not resurrecting anything. The impossibility is resurrection after the break down.

Fair enough, but you're starting to nit pick a little. It would at least be an important first step I would think ... and again, my point was that people seem to be thinking about it. Another of my points that got a bit overshadowed was to ask what boundary conditions we might be imposing (per my example of an adiabatic engine).

Further, I'll note that what you said seems to focus on human (or at least higher animal) death, since not every living thing has a brain. I'm OK with narrowing the topic to that.

But it does highlight some philosophical issues for the discussion such as, "What is a person?" If my hand is cut off, the hand might be called dead, but I am not. So, you further seem to indicate the person is his/her brain.

Next, then, what would actually constitute a resurrection? Must the brain be reconstituted from the same matter comprising the brain at the moment death occurred?

 

[essentialsaltes]

What would science say is impossible?

Using bitter water to prove adultery.

 

[Resha Caner]

Using bitter water to prove adultery.

Are you sure? Again, I'm not a medical expert, but I thought certain things, when ingested, could possibly cause a miscarriage. A sonogram might be a better idea now, but it wasn't available then.

 

[Tinker Grey]

But does the bitter water prove that the child was not the husband's?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Are you sure? Again, I'm not a medical expert, but I thought certain things, when ingested, could possibly cause a miscarriage. A sonogram might be a better idea now, but it wasn't available then.

Who said anything about miscarriages? The bitter water is a test for adultery.

 

[Resha Caner]

But does the bitter water prove that the child was not the husband's?

The water in and of itself? No, I don't think it does. Nor do I think the text is claiming that it does. It is interesting to me how these texts get boiled down to an anecdote that doesn't seem to represent it very well. This is very similar to the text about stoning that we just finished discussing in the Christian theology thread. Somehow the rhetoric getting passed around became "The Bible says to stone all your babies," which is not at all true.

Similarly here. This is a ritualistic trial of which the bitter water is only one part. [edit] And essentialsaltes, it's all about miscarriage. The test determines whether the woman was pregnant or not.

Numbers 5:11-31
And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 12 “Speak to the people of Israel, If any man's wife goes astray and breaks faith with him, 13 if a man lies with her sexually, and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband, and she is undetected though she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her, since she was not taken in the act, 14 and if the spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife who has defiled herself, or if the spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife, though she has not defiled herself, 15 then the man shall bring his wife to the priest and bring the offering required of her, a tenth of an ephah[c] of barley flour. He shall pour no oil on it and put no frankincense on it, for it is a grain offering of jealousy, a grain offering of remembrance, bringing iniquity to remembrance.

16 “And the priest shall bring her near and set her before the Lord. 17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthenware vessel and take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. 18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord and unbind the hair of the woman's head and place in her hands the grain offering of remembrance, which is the grain offering of jealousy. And in his hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse. 19 Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, ‘If no man has lain with you, and if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while you were under your husband's authority, be free from this water of bitterness that brings the curse. 20 But if you have gone astray, though you are under your husband's authority, and if you have defiled yourself, and some man other than your husband has lain with you, 21 then’ (let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse, and say to the woman) ‘the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your thigh fall away and your body swell. 22 May this water that brings the curse pass into your bowels and make your womb swell and your thigh fall away.’ And the woman shall say, ‘Amen, Amen.’

23 “Then the priest shall write these curses in a book and wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain. 25 And the priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy out of the woman's hand and shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 And the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering, as its memorial portion, and burn it on the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water. 27 And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children.

29 “This is the law in cases of jealousy, when a wife, though under her husband's authority, goes astray and defiles herself, 30 or when the spirit of jealousy comes over a man and he is jealous of his wife. Then he shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall carry out for her all this law. 31 The man shall be free from iniquity, but the woman shall bear her iniquity.”

 

[CabVet]

The water in and of itself? No, I don't think it does. Nor do I think the text is claiming that it does.

Oh come on, really? Verse 27 and 28 (copied from your own text) say so.

27 And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children.

It says right there that the water will only take effect if the woman was unfaithful.

 

[essentialsaltes]

And essentialsaltes, it's all about miscarriage. The test determines whether the woman was pregnant or not.

"if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband"

This does not require being pregnant.

"But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean"

This does not require not being pregnant.

 

[TheBear]

Fair enough, but you're starting to nit pick a little.

Actually, he pointed out a major distinction ... which was needed. Else, the goalposts tend to shift. (Not you, personally. I've just seen it happen so many times around here, I've come to expect it.)

But it does highlight some philosophical issues for the discussion such as, "What is a person?"

So, every form of life is a "person"? What are we really talking about, resurrection of "life" or resurrection of "person"?

 

[Resha Caner]

I'll admit my memory was faulty here.

Many have historically read this to mean she was pregnant, but I'm not sure the exegesis would bear that out, so I'll just concede for this discussion that it doesn't have to mean she's pregnant.

My other point was the ritualistic trial involved here. The use of "holy water" implies a definite spiritual element to the whole thing, so we'd have to get into the issue of whether science plays in that sandbox or not ... much like the old threads I recall about trying to measure prayer.

 

[Resha Caner]

So, every form of life is a "person"? What are we really talking about, resurrection of "life" or resurrection of "person"?

It was CabVet's example, not mine, so I'll let him define it as he chooses. I was asking him what he meant, not debating the point.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I'll admit my memory was faulty here.

Many have historically read this to mean she was pregnant, but I'm not sure the exegesis would bear that out, so I'll just concede for this discussion that it doesn't have to mean she's pregnant.

Very good.

My other point was the ritualistic trial involved here. The use of "holy water" implies a definite spiritual element to the whole thing, so we'd have to get into the issue of whether science plays in that sandbox or not ... much like the old threads I recall about trying to measure prayer.

Would her "womb ... swell, and her thigh ... fall away" in a spiritual sense?

EDIT: Ok, perhaps you mean that the bitter water could not be dispensed in a plastic cup by a lab-suited scientist in a double blind experiment. This may be, but it could also be done with all of the spiritual necessities and simply observed by scientists.

 

[TheBear]

What would science say is impossible?

Miracles and "God did it".

 

[Resha Caner]

Ok, perhaps you mean that the bitter water could not be dispensed in a plastic cup by a lab-suited scientist in a double blind experiment. This may be, but it could also be done with all of the spiritual necessities and simply observed by scientists.

I don't think observation would work ... which was the same answer I gave to prayer. I doubt any priest would give their consent to such a thing, so it would have to be done through stealth ... maybe possible, but not very ethical. Further, the whole thing implies God's participation (i.e. holy water), and the scientist can never verify that God agreed to participate.

[edit] Getting the consent of the couple would be another issue. The mere idea of it makes me laugh. Hey, jealous husband, would you agree to let the whole world know you're a cuckold and participate in an experiment to see if this really works? And of course a wife who's been cheating with her husband is going to be completely honest so we know if the result was correct, and ...

 

[Resha Caner]

Miracles and "God did it".

Science says God is impossible? Citation please.

 

[CabVet]

Science says God is impossible? Citation please.

Easy there, that's not what he said. Here try this one: parting the Red Sea is impossible.

 

[pgp_protector]

Easy there, that's not what he said. Here try this one: parting the Red Sea is impossible.

But what about the "Sea of Reeds" ?

 

[CabVet]

But what about the "Sea of Reeds" ?

Not nearly as impressive if it is just a translation issue, and still impossible to part the actual Red Sea.

 

[pgp_protector]

Not nearly as impressive if it is just a translation issue, and still impossible to part the actual Red Sea.

Now are you talking the "Hollywood Version" or the "Biblical Version" ?
Scientists Explain Red Sea Parting and Other Miracles - ABC News
Crossing the Red Sea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia