A Question for Christians

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]

I think you're very right. I was raised Catholic and yes... I had to ask myself what I felt were some very tough questions. Perhaps more difficult was accepting the answers I inevitably came up with.
I do admire people like NotReady, BluffThis, BigDaddyO, RJT, etc., who seem quite willing to stay on message and don't run away. I just wish I understood the rationale they use.

[/ QUOTE ]

As you read through the treads on this forum you'll find lots of evidence that it the "asking myself some tough questions" is the part most xtrians haven't done. I'm not claiming their conclusion would be anything like mine, I'm always surprised that it's obvious they haven't 'been there' before. Here's an example from the recent "Athiests; a question. " thread. Two statements by the same poster just a couple posts apart -
[ QUOTE ]
We could say that at 8:53pm he ceases to be alive, but he doesn't cease to exist until some time after that. That's George in the hospital bed, and he's dead. So, I'll grant that he ceases to be alive at 8:53pm, but tell me why you think he ceases to exist at 8:53pm.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's my view too by the way--that once I'm dead I no longer exist.

[/ QUOTE ]
Now, even if there is some way to reconcile those statements, then the klutziness of the expression would indicate this is new territory at anything but periscope depth.
Or look at Bluffthis' reaction to this common type of philosophical question. (and it can't be discounted as impossible in the future, which a 18th century ducker could hide behind).Bluffthis-
[ QUOTE ]
(A) Ridiculous questions don't indicate a sincere desire to learn, but to start a debate about improbable hypothetical situations and "details"..... (B) And David pointed out that there is an obvious logical answer.

[/ QUOTE ]
If somebody asks me a question with an obvious logical answer, I'd usually give it and if asked for the logic I'd say "cheeesh, if ..." in some mildly condescending tone.
But apparently this particular obvious logical answer requires I research back a few centuries to when the brain was used for cooling blood -
[ QUOTE ]
If you are sincere, then google for Aquinas+soul+summa or soul+catechism+catholic for the catholic beliefs,

[/ QUOTE ]
Like you, I appreciate Bigdaddyo's stab at it but does his reply sound like he's went into this area in depth at some time.. "where is the soul, how is it attached to me, is it me, does it make the decisions or do I, if it does then what am I, if it doesn't then what role does it play, why does it matter what happens to the body upon death if the soul has left, has it left, does it leave immediately"
"how come Casper can put his hand through the wall yet pick up the phone".
I don't buy Bluffthis's "obvious logical answer" statement. I find these areas tough at best and very difficult to harness in a total logical framework. luckyme

[bluesbassman]

A related question to Christians is what, exactly, is the mental manifestation of my "soul" in the afterlife? For example, if I die completely senile from Alzheimer's at 90 years old and go to heaven, will I (or my "soul") also be senile in the afterlife? If not, at which "point" from my mortal life will my cognitive function be restored? As I was at age 21? Age 40? From my perspective, that has changed significantly over my lifetime so far.

How about those who die as newborn babies, or even before? In what sense do such souls experience an afterlife?

I suspect the answer from Christians is that our souls are cognizant in the afterlife in a way we cannot understand as living beings. However, that means the Christian (and others) beliefs once again collapse into a muck of unintelligibility upon close examination.

[ QUOTE ]
In what sense do such souls experience an afterlife?


[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you read the Bible if you really care for the answer to that question, rather than having it spoonfed to you over an internet forum.

Though, as any intelligent person can surmise, answers to such questions clearly do not exist outside of one man's interpretation of the Bible (which clearly does not automatically equal another man's interpretation)

[imported_luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest you read the Bible if you really care for the answer to that question, rather than having it spoonfed to you over an internet forum.
Though, as any intelligent person can surmise, answers to such questions clearly do not exist outside of one man's interpretation of the Bible (which clearly does not automatically equal another man's interpretation)

[/ QUOTE ]
It's 2-way comments like these that baffle me. I ask my neighbour george, "What's your opinion of X". He says, "Go read the bible. Mind you, It won't give you my opinion. and everybody may well have a different opinion"
I take it that bible will therefore give me my opinion ( which is one of my basic claims about religion - we bring our morals and prejudices to it, and either find one that supports them, or interpret one in a way that does.)

[Lestat]

To an atheist (and anyone who has the inclination to contemplate), these questions are anything but ridiculous. I think it's as Luckme suggests: It is ridiculous to YOU, because you refuse to think about anything outside your given beliefs.

If the answer is so easy, why didn't you answer? Why are Christians against cremation? If the soul is not indigenous to the flesh then why is the body and blood of Christ so symbolic?

Also, this is not something improbable. Scientists have learned that the brain does not age as fast as the rest of the body. The brains is capable of functioning for many years longer than our bodies. So who's to say that this won't one day be possible?

[Lestat]

I think you need to look outside the 5 senses. I'm a non-believer and I think our 5 senses are actually limiting our experience of the universe.

If I were a believer, I'd tell you that once we die, the soul is freed, no longer bound by just the 5 senses in which we can experience everything. We are now exposed to God's full glory and His creation. Things like Alzheimer's, senility, and the lack of earthly sensory perception of a newborn are baseless.

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
lots of stuff insinuating that christians don't think.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the most likely reason that someone like BLUFFThis avoided the whole "debate" is because Lestat's intention was transparent. Lestat presented a "simple' question with very little details and wanted an answer. The transparent intention is that he will then follow up with numerous "complications" attacking each answer given -- in an attempt to trap the responder. If you follow Lestat's later posting you can see this exact thing happens, as he begins to introduce things like physiological connections, etc.

This is not an "honest question" or even seeking to debate -- it is a weak reasoner method of discrediting his "opponent". This is why it is pointless to "debate" or attempt to answer Lestat's "question"; because it isn't really a question but rather a poorly disguised trap. Do you honestly believe that Lestat has any intention of changing his already held stance that "Christianity is stupid and so are those brainless fools that believe it."? I think it is pretty obvious that the answer is "Hell NO!".

[IronUnkind]

When a fart leaves my butt does it continue to be MY fart?

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
To an atheist (and anyone who has the inclination to contemplate), these questions are anything but ridiculous. I think it's as Luckme suggests: It is ridiculous to YOU, because you refuse to think about anything outside your given beliefs.

If the answer is so easy, why didn't you answer?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please see my reply to someone else above; and I think I was pretty dead on, as you have proven even more with this post.

[ QUOTE ]
Why are Christians against cremation?

[/ QUOTE ]

It has nothing to do with the soul. The body is a creation of God, and those things that God creates should not be defiled or destroyed. This is the same reason that Sloth and Gluttony are sins, as well as why addiction is viewed as undesirable.

Also, not all Christian religions are against cremation. You did of course in your contemplative brilliance realize that "Christian" doesn't really narrow things down right? You really can't intelligently group Baptists, Catholics, Mormons, Lutherans, Episcapalians, Adventists, Born-again, etc as one set of beliefs. Sure they share a core, but there are significant differences ( Mormons really being very different ).

Also, the Catholic church via the Pope lifted the ban on cremation in 1963 -- so you're contemplated arguement is just over 42 years out of date.

[ QUOTE ]

If the soul is not indigenous to the flesh then why is the body and blood of Christ so symbolic?


[/ QUOTE ]

Because the first gifting of the Christ's body and blood occured while he was still alive, at the "last supper". Also, within more "Christian" teachings Christ was not human -- so attempting to apply any symbolism regarding his body and blood to those of a mortal, is perhaps misleading.

Also, you asked elsewhere
[ QUOTE ]

I like your analogy. So if George's brain is put in Harry's body and now Harry's body commits a mortal sin, then George's soul goes to hell, right?


[/ QUOTE ]

I will attempt to answer this once you explain to me how the body commits a mortal sin w/o the involvement of the brain.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lots of stuff insinuating that christians don't think.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the most likely reason that someone like BLUFFThis avoided the whole "debate" is because Lestat's intention was transparent. Lestat presented a "simple' question with very little details and wanted an answer. The transparent intention is that he will then follow up with numerous "complications" attacking each answer given -- in an attempt to trap the responder. If you follow Lestat's later posting you can see this exact thing happens, as he begins to introduce things like physiological connections, etc.

This is not an "honest question" or even seeking to debate -- it is a weak reasoner method of discrediting his "opponent". This is why it is pointless to "debate" or attempt to answer Lestat's "question"; because it isn't really a question but rather a poorly disguised trap. Do you honestly believe that Lestat has any intention of changing his already held stance that "Christianity is stupid and so are those brainless fools that believe it."? I think it is pretty obvious that the answer is "Hell NO!".

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to join in our discussions more often. This was an excellent reply and indeed the reason I don't keep threads going to amuse such posters. And like you said, they keep pretending not to understand while adding more and more minute questions about an already ridiculous premise.

While taking positions to their logical extremes is a valid method to expose the full implications of various arguements, these types of far out hypothetical questions only have the intentions you gave.

A sincere person wanting to understand christianity can read the bible and commentaries and catechisms on same. If they wish to honestly know more about buddhism, then they can read the sutras and writings of buddhists through the ages. Same with science or any other topic.

We got a whole squad of these guys infesting this forum and they keep making new accounts when people finally realize they are being toyed with and stop responding.