Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by NOGO: Science has really made this question difficult. If we go back a couple of centuries them it all becomes that much simpler. Let see... Witchcraft, ghosts, haunted houses, souls ... Is that enough.

No. I'm talking about people today. Try again. Had you lived a couple of centuries ago, then those answers would be acceptable.

NOGO

First, I want to add atrology to the list.

This is your way out. Fine.
You must understand that with the age of reason and science all the occult beliefs including the belief in God have taken a beating.

Today, I do not believe that 80% of people in the world believe in God. China and Japan together account for 20% of the world's population. You're off to a bad start.

But please explain this.

You accept the fact that two centuries ago there was many extraodinary beliefs held by a majority of people.
I am sure that you will agree that 200 years ago there was far fewer atheists.

You claim here that I do not see something which is obvious.

Now why is it that the obvious has changed in the last two hundred years.

Please explain why it has changed.
It was not obvious 200 years ago and is now obvious.

... and this change cannot be explained by the emergence of science.

What is it that should have been obvious to me?

[ June 24, 2002: Message edited by: NOGO ]</p>

NOGO

Polycarp,

I would appreciate it if you can answer my post on the three states
1. The soul
2. The corruptible body
3. The incorruptible body

and also please do tells us if you were a Christian before being an agnostic.

Take care.
NOGO

lpetrich

And if one wishes to use longevity as a criterion, then there are lots of religions that have lasted longer than Christianity. The champions for longevity must certainly be various pagan sorts of religions. Examples:

The Pharaonic-Egyptian religion was first documented when the Egyptians learned to write at around 3000 BCE, and it lasted until it was outlawed by some Christian Roman Emperors around 400-500 CE.

The old-time religions of Europe, Iran, and India have elements that can be extrapolated back to reconstruct some of the religion practiced by the speakers of the ancestral Indo-European dialects about 4000 BCE just north of the Black Sea. One can reconstruct for them a god fo the shining sky who went by the name "Father Sky" (Tiu/Tyr, Jupiter, Zeus Pater, Dyaus Pitar), and a god of war and thunder who wielded an ax and fought a snake monster (Thor, Indra, ...). As the ancestral-IE speakers spread out, they tended to absorb the religious beliefs and practices of those they overran, making reconstruction somewhat difficult.

And if one wishes to extrapolate from artwork, there is in the southern-Turkey site of Catal Huyuk at about 6000 BCE a famous statuette showing a pregnant woman with a big cat at each side. Fast-forward to Minoan-era Crete at about 1500 BCE, where we find some artwork depicting a woman on top of a small hill with a big cat at each side of that hill and a worshipful-looking man a bit further distant. Fast-forward again to classical Greece around 500 BCE and later, where Artemis was worshipped as a Mistress of Wild Animals and a helper of women giving birth.

So give us some really old-time religion.

Give us Amon-Ra and Osiris and Isis and Hathor and Horus and Set and Thoth and...

Give us Father Sky and Mr. Thunder and ...

Give us the Mistress of Animals!

And are these religions really much more absurd than orthodox Christianity?

[ June 25, 2002: Message edited by: lpetrich ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

Polycarp
There isn't a single person who posts here who would have a discussion with someone who demanded answers to 53 questions. Is this how you always discuss topics - ask someone a massive list of questions and then label them a "cop-out" when they refuse to answer all of them? Get real. I think you're being unreasonable.
I think whatever you have done here so far has taken time. And it takes even more of your time as we proceed so the idea of you lacking time does not arise.
You can only dismiss my questions if they are irrelevant as Vorkosigan has implied and its because of that that I have moved them to another forum.
They were not 53 questions and even if you divide them to 53, they were short answer questions, some were even repeated you could have answers that cover a group of them at a go. Of course you did the easiest thing: complain that they were too many and fail to countenance them or the issues they raised.

But I appreciate the idea that they were not BC & A questions so I rest my case. It was fun debating with you.

NOGO

I would like to add "life after death" to the list.

brighid

Polycarp,

I will be out until Monday so I won't be able to respond until then.

Brighid

Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by NOGO: and also please do tells us if you were a Christian before being an agnostic.

Depends on if you think I was old enough to know what I believed. As a child I was raised to believe in Christianity, but by the time I was about 13 I was agnostic.

I have a friend who was raised in an agnostic home (no religious background) who is now a Christian. I know people who were raised as Christians and are now atheists.

The point is that we can't say, "Only atheists/agnostics have critically examined their beliefs." That's nonsensical.

Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by NOGO: You talk about "dualism" which implies two states but actually there seems to be three. 1. The soul 2. The corruptible body 3. The incorruptible body Paul says that those alive will go from 2 to 3 in an instant while the dead will rise incorruptible and join Jesus forever. What you are saying is that before they rise their souls were already with Jesus. So we will be in the Soul state from death till the end of the world. Correct? For example the thief or Daniel are currently with Jesus in heaven as souls, will be raised incorruptible when Jesus returns and then will go back to heaven. Is this your understanding of it ?

I think you’re only getting most of the story, while missing a small piece. Dualism=body+soul. The transformation from corruptible body to incorruptible body is exactly that: a transformation. Nobody ever exists in all three states at one time. Dualism refers to the fact that humans are comprised of two natures: body and soul. The only change is from a corruptible body to an incorruptible body. During the interim from the time a person dies until the end of the age, they only exist in the form of a soul. Hence, the term “temporary disembodiment.” At the end of the age, those souls that have been separated from their bodies will be reunited with their incorruptible bodies.

If you’re really interested in understanding the Christian view on the topic, then I’d read “Risen Indeed” by Stephen T. Davis. Even Jeff Lowder, of SecWeb fame and skeptical worldview, recommends the book. Chapters 5-7 cover all of the issues you are raising. Check it out here: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802801269/qid=1025031301/sr=1-11/ref=sr_1_11/002-8432876-3263262" target="_blank">http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802801269/qid=1025031301/sr=1-11/ref=sr_1_11/002-8432876-3263262</a>

Quote:

I am surprized that you say this. Does Matthew 24:30-31 describe an event different than Cor 15:52

There are many different interpretations of Matthew 24:30-31 and the entire Olivet discourse. My opinion is that they refer to closely linked events (ie second coming & resurrection), but they are not actually referring to the same event.

Quote:

It seems to me that Jesus gave the example. He stated beforehand that he would dies and remain in the earth for three days and three nights. He would then rise. Was Jesus in the form of a soul during his stay in hades?

Jesus is the exception to the rule. This is why Paul refers to the resurrection of Jesus as the “firstfruits” (see 1 Cor 15:20-25). The resurrection of Jesus is the model on which our resurrection takes place, but our resurrection does not take place until the return of Jesus (see esp. 1 Cor 15:23).

I don’t know what form Jesus was in during his stay in Hades. I’m not sure of its relevance.

Quote:

I hope that you at least understood my point about being earthbound. The end-of-the-world is not necessary if you believe in a heaven which is not the "sky" as you say. A heaven in the spiritual realm. If souls are already with Jesus after their death the end of the world and final judgements are unnecessary.

Ummm… I think I might see where you’re confused here. The final judgement isn’t just to punish people. It is also the place of reward (ie Rev 22:12, 1 Cor 3:12-15, Eph 6:7-8, 2 John 8). The “end of the world” is to eliminate evil once and for all. (See the 1 Cor 15:20-28 passage).

Polycarp

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich: And if one wishes to use longevity as a criterion, then there are lots of religions that have lasted longer than Christianity. The champions for longevity must certainly be various pagan sorts of religions. Examples:

Who is using longevity as a criterion? I certainly don't believe longevity to be a reliable indicator of the truthfulness of a claim.