Search results

I've been listening to Senator Fetterman lately, and he's beginning to sound like an Independent. He's also been willing to go against his party on some issues. This is just a sample of his views that makes me see his Independent side... Start at 1:30 mark I don't care if he switches to...

My point has never been that humans are literally created in the image of God. The details from Genesis 1:26 that I focused on was that more than one person was involved in the act of creating since it says, "let us create in our image". That has been my focus point. 👇 The point that you...

Moderator Comment Unless a joke was given, please do not respond to someone's post with laughing emojis. When this is done, especially frequently, this can be taken as ridiculing or belittling. Such behavior is against the rules of the forum. *Moderator Comments are just friendly reminders.

For several years, I've tried to explain the relationship between consciousness and the brain. I've recently settled on a safe and reasonable conclusion - one that isn't needlessly restrictive and that also fits the data. Today, I used Ai to aid in fleshing out my view, and I'll share some of...

Good points. I would though remove interests out of the picture, otherwise your position opens itself for criticism of introducing preference. In my view, God doesn't have to be someone that we would follow or that we find some interests in. There could be no god or a boring god, like a deist...

Just added a guideline for this (also posted in the Rules & Guidelines section of the forum)...

I invite all participants of this thread to join this discussion on the practicality of the type of moral view that William shared earlier... Here's the new discussion...

One forum member outlined a moral framework that is very good and interesting: I wanted to explore this more in practical terms by asking one of the hardest questions relating to evil in the world. Let's consider this event that happened over the weekend - reported by CNN: Using the moral...

I've already acknowledged that angels existed before Earth's creation. Here's from one of my previous posts: If we go with your scenario that God was speaking to angels (and not God speaking amongst the 3 beings that make up the Trinity), you still would need to explain who is the "our"...

From another thread.... Agreed, William. Sure, the ability to think may be altered or may even cease (e.g. during anesthesia?), but the bare minimum state of consciousness is still there - awareness. Perhaps we can even say that awareness is the subject and object in that case, and I think...

@William Started a thread to examine the theory of the brain as a 'medium'... https://theagnosticforum.com/threads/the-brain-as-a-medium-for-consciousness.1180/#post-8121

For several years, I've tried to explain the relationship between consciousness and the brain. I've recently settled on a safe and reasonable conclusion - one that isn't needlessly restrictive and that also fits the data. Today, I used Ai to aid in fleshing out my view, and I'll share some of...

I posted an explanation earlier that explains this passage. While I don't agree with the explanation completely, but I liked their approach. Basically what was said in Matthew 16 also has a parallel version in Mark and Luke's Gospel. Matthew 16:28 28 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing...

It would be one thing if Jesus was claiming that he would return during the lifetime of the Apostles. Jesus is supposed to be all-knowing so he would've definitely been proven wrong. Paul has more leeway because he sometimes admits to stating opinion and not revelation.

God may've been speaking to angels, but who was the one saying they would create? The person or persons that are being referred to as "us" are also saying they would "create". The flaw in your point is that you're focusing just on the word "us", and not what the "us" is doing, i.e. "creating"...

I was probably just correcting the record on where the passage comes from. My observation is that when God is mentioned, it sometimes refers to just the Father. Other times it refers to multiple beings, like in Genesis. That's why in some cases, you find God being talked about in plural form...

(y) Honestly wouldn't be interested in committing to either. I do admire and follow some Christian teachings.

Regarding brain and consciousness: - Nothing about the brain tells us why and how consciousness exists. We only know that brain states correlate with conscious states, which could just as easily mean that the brain is just a medium (could be one of many) for consciousness to express itself...

Hmmm... the way you've explained here makes it sound like a personal being like the Christian God, except your God is more generic. If so, that would take away the advantage depending on how personal this being gets. I contrast this with your other explanations that equate God with just being...

Not on purpose. I usually go for the easy-to-understand sites, like GotQuestions.org. I do think they are fairly reasonable and a good starting point, but that doesn't mean they're always right. I also think a lot of people accept that some of the apostles believed that Jesus would return...