17 minutes ago, m_m said:

Very nice

Just established, evidence based science that is taught and demonstrated to students.

Since you do not seem to be aware of any of this biology this may help.

https://www.msdmanuals.com/home/brain-spinal-cord-and-nerve-disorders/autonomic-nervous-system-disorders/overview-of-the-autonomic-nervous-system

Edited June 15Jun 15 by pinball1970

3 hours ago, m_m said:

You contradict yourself. AI is artificial intelligence. People say, that intelligence can be artificial. And everyone agrees.

Not even everyone on this site agrees.

You’re making lots of sweeping statements with absolutely zero backing to them. Perhaps it’s time to stop digging and distracting.

@Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist So on the question of the soul say how do you go from science back to the Bible? It turns out that is a very interesting question not from the Biology/biochemistry side but from how the ancients thought about the body, the soul and the afterlife.

The ancient Israelites for instance did not have the concept of the soul at all in their thinking, this was a much later idea.  

God breathed life into Adam and when he died when people die, that life was gone.

 I would look into the meaning of the word Sheol, it does not mean hell as I was taught, it means “pit” or “grave” because when you died you were simply dead.

Same with “Gehenna” in the NT, this was not meant to be hell either, it was a real valley outside Jerusalem.

Platonic thinking did influence things regarding the afterlife, along with the concept of reward for a good life and punishment for a bad one.

A very good overview of how these themes were adopted then adapted in the book “Heaven and Hell” by Bart Ehrman.

  https://ehrmanblog.org/heaven-and-hell-in-a-nutshell/

21 minutes ago, pinball1970 said:

@Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist So on the question of the soul say how do you go from science back to the Bible? It turns out that is a very interesting question not from the Biology/biochemistry side but from how the ancients thought about the body, the soul and the afterlife.

The ancient Israelites for instance did not have the concept of the soul at all in their thinking, this was a much later idea.  

God breathed life into Adam and when he died when people die, that life was gone.

 I would look into the meaning of the word Sheol, it does not mean hell as I was taught, it means “pit” or “grave” because when you died you were simply dead.

Same with “Gehenna” in the NT, this was not meant to be hell either, it was a real valley outside Jerusalem.

Platonic thinking did influence things regarding the afterlife, along with the concept of reward for a good life and punishment for a bad one.

A very good overview of how these themes were adopted then adapted in the book “Heaven and Hell” by Bart Ehrman.

  https://ehrmanblog.org/heaven-and-hell-in-a-nutshell/

He's trying to sell a book...

Heaven and hell are the same thing, two sides of the same coin; in a nutshell, heaven is what I get if I follow the rules, hell is what they get if they don't. It's justice controlled by a trusted arbiter, whatever side you're on...

Just now, pinball1970 said:

@Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist So on the question of the soul say how do you go from science back to the Bible? It turns out that is a very interesting question not from the Biology/biochemistry side but from how the ancients thought about the body, the soul and the afterlife.

The ancient Israelites for instance did not have the concept of the soul at all in their thinking, this was a much later idea.  

God breathed life into Adam and when he died when people die, that life was gone.

 I would look into the meaning of the word Sheol, it does not mean hell as I was taught, it means “pit” or “grave” because when you died you were simply dead.

Same with “Gehenna” in the NT, this was not meant to be hell either, it was a real valley outside Jerusalem.

Platonic thinking did influence things regarding the afterlife, along with the concept of reward for a good life and punishment for a bad one.

A very good overview of how these themes were adopted then adapted in the book “Heaven and Hell” by Bart Ehrman.

  https://ehrmanblog.org/heaven-and-hell-in-a-nutshell/

New stuff to me. +1

One thing about the Bible is that you always learn something new everytime your read it in the way I suggested

Edited June 16Jun 16 by studiot

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

He's trying to sell a book...

M not the author. I am recommending the book but it is not a completely new idea. Even Hitchens mentioned it.

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

Heaven and hell are the same thing, two sides of the same coin; in a nutshell, heaven is what I get if I follow the rules, hell is what they get if they don't.

The point is it was not always like that in Jewish thinking and Jesus did not think that either.

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

if I follow the rules

This is the thing. You consider these to be rules. Like here is some list, if you follow it - you go to heaven, if you don't - you go to hell.

10 minutes ago, m_m said:

This is the thing. You consider these to be rules. Like here is some list, if you follow it - you go to heaven, if you don't - you go to hell.

Like Commandments, or something?

7 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Like Commandments, or something?

Yes. I am not a theologist, and I very cautiously think that this attitude distinguishes The Old Testament from The New Testament. Because if you love your neighbor, and act with love, you don't need rules.  You don't even consider them to be rules.

I always thought that one needed a lot of strength to turn one's cheek and at the same time not look like a victim.  The thing is, if you turn your cheek because of love, you will never be a victim, or a hypocrite.  

Edited June 16Jun 16 by m_m

Just now, m_m said:

Because if you love your neighbor, and act with love, you don't need rules.  

Possibly the best council in the whole bible.

Yet not something cannot be appreciated by the non religeous or that even needs religeon.

Interestingly the sermon on the mount was almost word for word the same as the teaching by Loa Tsu in the tai ching many years beofre.

14 minutes ago, studiot said:

Possibly the best council in the whole bible.

This is my thought and i can be wrong.

""Be under obligation to no one — the only obligation you have is to love one another. Whoever does this has obeyed the Law. "Romans 13:8

If you don't mind, i want to change this sentence:

Because if you love your neighbor, and act with love, you don't even consider them to be rules.

Just now, m_m said:

This is my thought and i can be wrong.

""Be under obligation to no one — the only obligation you have is to love one another. Whoever does this has obeyed the Law. "Romans 13:8

If you don't mind, i want to change this sentence:

Because if you love your neighbor, and act with love, you don't even consider them to be rules.

Matthew

Gospel of Matthew

"Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" He said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. ' This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Nice discussion I just read. @pinball1970 on the topic of the soul, the Bible has lots of references and teachings about it and even how to treated. There are connections the Bible makes between the soul and emotions, which I have to related to many times. For example, when you do something wrong and you feel convicted. Now you feel bad, which hurts your soul because your soul counsels your emotions (or maybe vice versa I can't quite recall it right now). But that's just me.

Quick question regarding the last thread: should I deep dive into each homo species after I've learned and studied the paleolithic era before moving to the mesolithic (in Africa)?

16 minutes ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

Nice discussion I just read. @pinball1970 on the topic of the soul, the Bible has lots of references and teachings about it and even how to treated. There are connections the Bible makes between the soul and emotions, which I have to related to many times. For example, when you do something wrong and you feel convicted. Now you feel bad, which hurts your soul because your soul counsels your emotions (or maybe vice versa I can't quite recall it right now). But that's just me.

Quick question regarding the last thread: should I deep dive into each homo species after I've learned and studied the paleolithic era before moving to the mesolithic (in Africa)?

Not if you are exploring the evolution of Man. Palaeolithic, mesolithic and neolithic are cultural stages in human society (= Old Stone Age, Middle Stone Age and New Stone Age, respectively). They relate to the types of artifacts produced in these societies and have nothing to do with biological evolution, as they are all far too recent.

If you want to explore human evolution the relevant time periods are geological ones, namely the ones shown in the “Hominin Timeline” chart in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Edited June 16Jun 16 by exchemist

12 minutes ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

Bible has lots of references and teachings about it and even how to treated.

Yes it is not straightforward. It was not a matter if the Hebrews being polytheistic then suddenly just start worshipping one god Yhwh.

Or had one view and one view only on the nature of god and the afterlife.

Historians make a best guess as to what happening at what times based on the available evidence.

Then I can read their general readers books on the subject and discuss it with you guys!

18 minutes ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

should I deep dive into each homo species after I've learned and studied the paleolithic era before moving to the mesolithic (in Africa)?

Phew, I'm not sure. For man's origins, I wanted to start from the very beginning in terms of the paleontology, the history. That might not be the best way for you to do it.

It is a fantastic story though! Raymond Dart, Eugene Dubious, The Leaky family, Rift Valley, Olduvai gorge, Lucy, Ardi and more recently Homo naledi.

@TheVat UG was Biology so I will ping him in.

"The Origin of our species" Chris Stringer, is a great starter and does not scrimp on technical details!

It is a beautiful story, interesting, it is our history.

I will check in tomorrow.

It says in “2 Peter 3:8 ESV But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”

It then says in “Exodus 20:11 ESV For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”

Is this not fundamentally incorrect with the modern estimate for the Earths age?

IMO religion is to be used only with a moral sense, it serves as an excellent moral compass and as Carl Sagan said, “deals with great literature, poetry” and such.

5 minutes ago, Sohan Lalwani said:

It says in “2 Peter 3:8 ESV But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”

It then says in “Exodus 20:11 ESV For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”

Is this not fundamentally incorrect with the modern estimate for the Earths age?

IMO religion is to be used only with a moral sense, it serves as an excellent moral compass and as Carl Sagan said, “deals with great literature, poetry” and such.

Look at how it says that just like a day is a thousand years, a thousand years is like a day. I'm choosing to do what others have recommended before in this thread: don't take everything literally. The Bible is very symbolic in lots of areas just like it's literal. Sometimes it's painfully obvious, but sometimes you have to have discernment. It's like art in a sense (well, technically, literature is an art form). This is one of those times you need to discern. The Lord may be saying that the seventh day of the week is the Sabbath to symbolize the last 1000 years it might have taken to make the earth. It would make sense considering the chronological order of other prehistoric events taking place before and after this was written.

Edited June 16Jun 16 by Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2
Missing word

2 minutes ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

Look at how it says that just like a day is a thousand years, a thousand years is like a day. I'm choosing to do what others have recommended before in this thread: don't take everything literally. The Bible is very symbolic in lots of areas just like it's literal. Sometimes it's painfully obvious, but sometimes you have to have discernment. It's like art in a sense (well, technically, literature is an art form). This is one of those times you need to discern. The Lord may be saying that the seventh day of the week is the Sabbath to symbolize the last 1000 years it might have taken to make the earth. It would make sense considering the chronological order of other prehistoric taking place before and after this was written.

That’s the point of what I said, you can’t take it literally, you can take it morally. Also, some other verse such as Isaiah 40:22 mention that “He (The Lord) sits above the circle of the Earth,” this is scientifically incompatible my friend. Also I think the term you are looking for is “ancient” as the Ubaid period in Mesopotamia occurred roughly 6000 years ago, prehistoric refers to something before the invention of modern writing systems.

@Sohan Lalwani ohhhhh nevermind I see what you mean now

Unrelated: the amount of times I almost typed using Gen z words/grammar is funny

2 minutes ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

@Sohan Lalwani ohhhhh nevermind I see what you mean now

Unrelated: the amount of times I almost typed using Gen z words/grammar is funny

Hey it’s ok lol. Some words Gen Z uses is very convenient

5 hours ago, studiot said:

  5 hours ago, m_m said:

This is my thought and i can be wrong.

  Quote

Matthew

I'm thinking what you are disagree with.

5 hours ago, studiot said:

Yet not something cannot be appreciated by the non religeous or that even needs religeon.

Who am I to judge others, I try observe myself, but...how would you know of how to love others, or about loving one's neighbor at all, if there weren't religion? I just think that ability to love is a gift.

What does it mean to love others? What does it mean to love thyself?

9 hours ago, Sarae.the.wannabe.chemist2 said:

Look at how it says that just like a day is a thousand years, a thousand years is like a day. I'm choosing to do what others have recommended before in this thread: don't take everything literally. The Bible is very symbolic in lots of areas just like it's literal. Sometimes it's painfully obvious, but sometimes you have to have discernment. It's like art in a sense (well, technically, literature is an art form). This is one of those times you need to discern. The Lord may be saying that the seventh day of the week is the Sabbath to symbolize the last 1000 years it might have taken to make the earth. It would make sense considering the chronological order of other prehistoric events taking place before and after this was written.

Exactly. Also one has to remember St. Peter was writing hundreds of years later than the time Exodus was written. In fact you can see in this passage of Peter that he is in effect saying that God is outside time and perhaps suggesting an interpretation of the creation story in which the periods of actual time involved might have been far longer than literal “days”.

18 hours ago, m_m said:

Yes. I am not a theologist, and I very cautiously think that this attitude distinguishes The Old Testament from The New Testament. Because if you love your neighbor, and act with love, you don't need rules.  You don't even consider them to be rules.

The NT is by way of explaining the OT in a modern, for Jesus, way.

Jesus understood what the OT was trying to teach, so he was able to reinterpret the message; allowing for the evolution of knowledge, language and culture.

20 hours ago, pinball1970 said:

The point is it was not always like that in Jewish thinking and Jesus did not think that either.

But it did evolve, quite naturally I think, to include hell; for those who seem to get away with their crimes scot-free, they're so much more difficult to forgive; if they can get to heaven as well.

12 hours ago, m_m said:

What does it mean to love others? What does it mean to love thyself?

If you can forgive yourself for your worst thought/action, it's easier to forgive your fellow, flawed, humans for their's.

At least it should be, if one thinks about it properly...

Edited June 17Jun 17 by dimreepr

The ubermensch has it's antipode, Trump is just the latest iteration of "he who got it wrong",,,

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

The ubermensch has it's antipode, Trump is just the latest iteration of "he who got it wrong",,,

You know, as for me I didn't read Nietzsche, but why do you think that these phrase "he who got it wrong" refers to Trump? Did he start any war? Is he giving orders to kill people at the moment?

As far as I can see you live in the UK. Are you a citizen of the USA? People voted for Trump in their free choice and free will. It was a free choice of free people in the free country. And this is the most important thing.

Would you forgive those people, who voted for Trump, if you were a citizen of the USA? And if they were your relatives? Or friends? Would you forgive yourself, if you voted for Trump?

Maybe Darwin got it wrong? Einstein? No?

Edited June 18Jun 18 by m_m