Searching for GOD...

[wigginhall]

Friend of mine not long ago wrote and performed in his own version of said assassin's memories and motivations - in Barnstaple, forsooth. Somewhat esoteric.

Well, I don't know, 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead' caused an absolute storm when it came out, and it still does, quite dazzling really.   

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

So you are implying that the selection of a particular outcome by a capable agency is something over and above normal deterministic behaviour.

More "outside of" than "over and above" but, if you set up the conjecture about that supposed agency to be that way, then yes it would be.

Why you'd want to do that on the other hand (other that is than in the hope of chatting up impressionable seventeen-year-olds) and how you'd ever verify such a speculation is anyone's guess, but there it is.

[Dicky Underpants]

Well, I don't know, 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead' caused an absolute storm when it came out, and it still does, quite dazzling really.

I've yet to read that or see it. I really need to, just to see how much my friend may have plagiarised

[Samuel]

Hi Wiggs,

My seventeen-year-old daughter was telling me that a boy tried chatting her up recently with the "everything happens for a reason" line, to which she added that she thought in response, "So basically you're telling me that you're a bit thick then".

I've never been more proud of her!

BOOOOO! more sympathy for the boy I say. If there is one thing remember its how impossibly difficult it was to 'chat up' girls when I was seventeen. Mind you I have a daughter (only four at the mo) and I can quite imagine feeling that pride... but I hope there was a pang of empathy for the dismissed suitor in the back of your mind Blue.

[Nearly Sane]

Fascinating stuff.  My memory is that Shakespeare's religious ideas were ignored for a long time, but then in the 20th century, critics began to look more closely, and claimed to find a ton of such stuff.   Also the idea that Shakespeare covertly referred to Catholic ideas, which could not be done openly. 

Hamlet certainly refers to the religious prohibition of suicide, but I don't think that was specifically Catholic.

But very interesting point about Wittenberg, which would be seen immediately by the audience as Proddy.

I am always a bit worried about the possibility of over reading and on top of the open questions about Will's religion and sexuality, if you ever debate with someone who believes he wasn't the writer, you fall down a whole other rabbit hole. But, I do think that Wittenberg has to be give a clear reading of Protestant, and added to the 'heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy', it feels as if there is portent there.

[wigginhall]

I've yet to read that or see it. I really need to, just to see how much my friend may have plagiarised

Dicky, I have some tragic news, well, tragic for me.   This came out 50 years ago, when I hadn't started shaving, I suppose.  Gordon bleeding Miss Bennett.  I am old, I am old.

[Alan Burns]

I would be more impressed if you did have a Gold Blue Peter Badge

Sorry, I failed on that one   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hi Samuel,

BOOOOO! more sympathy for the boy I say. If there is one thing remember its how impossibly difficult it was to 'chat up' girls when I was seventeen. Mind you I have a daughter (only four at the mo) and I can quite imagine feeling that pride... but I hope there was a pang of empathy for the dismissed suitor in the back of your mind Blue.

No chance!

Yeah ok, maybe a little. Especially as my daughter can be pretty forensic in her dismissals, as I know to my cost. Forgive the showy-offy-ness but she's just had an offer from Cambridge too so we're feeling super proud just now.

Re Stoppard by the way, I read R&GAD as a teenager - far too young because when I read it again in my 40s it was full of ideas that had passed me by entirely the first time. Mind you, no doubt I'll say something similar when I'm in my 60s.

A Wiggs says, it's dazzling but I prefer "Arcadia" for its treatment of physics and the nature of reality. That said, I have fond memories of Felicity Kendall on stage in "Jumpers" too, albeit for reasons considerably less cerebral...

...sigh...

[floo]

Sorry, I failed on that one   

Our Down's Syndrome son has three Blue Peter badges.

[Dicky Underpants]

Dicky, I have some tragic news, well, tragic for me.   This came out 50 years ago, when I hadn't started shaving, I suppose.  Gordon bleeding Miss Bennett.  I am old, I am old.

Oh I know it's vintage. mea culpa for not reading it.

[wigginhall]

Re Felicity Kendall, now we're back to cup size, well, why not.   There's many a slip 'twixt lip and cup!   Hee, hee, hee.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Wiggs,

Re Felicity Kendall, now we're back to cup size, well, why not.   There's many a slip 'twixt lip and cup!   Hee, hee, hee.

Naughty step - now!

[wigginhall]

Wiggs,

Naughty step - now!

Aw sir, we have double maths in ten minutes, can't I just sit here and think about ladies underwear?

[Nearly Sane]

Re Felicity Kendall, now we're back to cup size, well, why not.   There's many a slip 'twixt lip and cup!   Hee, hee, hee.

Given the blistering start of the year when I saw Felicity Kendal's name, I though not the blessed Felicity dead as well.

Went to see her do a Q&A on her career after a showing of Shakespeare Wallah, when I was a moon struck 16 year old. Saw her in Stoppard's Hapgood with Nigel Hawthorne and Roger Rees, both ex of this parish, can't say I honestly understood it.

[wigginhall]

Yes, I find modern theatre and novels far too clever now.   Give me 'Law and Order' any day of the week. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The usage that blue cited is more New Ageish, and means something like, 'it's destiny that we've met like this', or really, it's part of a plan.    As blue said, a reasonable reply is to blow a raspberry.   

It's not a bad chat-up line, I suppose, better than 'what cup size are you?'.

Not all ladeees are materialists.....and those that are.....hang on to your wallets it's going to be a bumpy ride.

[Sebastian Toe]

Not all ladeees are materialists.....and those that are.....hang on to your wallets it's going to be a bumpy ride.

I'd like to laugh, but I just washed my hair.

[torridon]

Sorry if I have mislead you on earlier posts, but I have always maintained (or tried to!) that our free will is free from deterministic causes.  The fact that I can think of a word or action, and then implement it, implies that the source of our apparent free will is linked to our conscious awareness.  If we were not able to think of a word or action, I do not believe we could say the word or implement the action.   Our awareness not only perceives, but thinks!  So we really need to define what comprises a "conscious thought" in order to understand our perception of free will.  Is a conscious thought comprised soleley of the electrical state of many brain cells, or is it the interpretation of the electrical state of our brain cells.  If it is the latter, the question then is: what is it that interprets the electrical state of our brain cells?

The complex of neural activity in a brain is the interpretation, a thought is the higher cognitive interpretation of vaguer feelings emanating from lower levels of mind.  I don't see why we need a separate unevidenced entity to interpret the interpretation again. You only posit that in order to support a religious viewpoint I think. And even if there is some undetectable supernatural god who has decided to parachute some undetected supernatural entity called a soul into H.Sapiens to add a layer of spiritual cognition to humans why go about it the way you seem to imagine it, as some invisible being that has the unenviable task of looking at grey matter to try and interpret what is going on in a brain.  It is a massively difficult job to look at a brain and interpret what experience it is having, a bit like looking at the binary image of a running computer program and trying to reverse engineer the source code from that. Take sight, for example, if a soul can see, why take the perverse route of trying to derive the visual experience from the tangle of visual cortex, when if a soul is supernatural, surely it could see directly using its own powers ? Why would a soul use its powers to look at brain cells, rather than looking at trees and flowers and whatever it is that the brain is looking at ?

[Sassy]

Claimed achievements.

And yet again, rather than answer the specific questions posed to you, you continue with the "I am ever so clever" line.

Whoa there...

Isn't the academic achievement of scientists the reason you believe what they tell you?

Alan has achieved academically and you believe he has to claim himself "I am ever so clever" when his academic achievement's do that for him?  You cannot have double standards.... His academic achievement's prove him to be clever or no one with academic achievements can be said to be clever. Which is it?  Washes our credentials for all scientist who rely on their academic achievement's doesn't it?


Do you have the same education and equal to Alan? If not then you are in no position to claim what you do.
Had he been an atheist he would have been praised by you. You are very poor in argument. Either attack his points of accept defeat. That intellectually you are not capable of understanding Alan on such academic levels.

[Sassy]

If your logic is as good as you claim it to be, how come you can believe the less than credible things in the Bible to be true, when logic would deem them to be false?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology

How could any of the educated men believe the bible and in God?

Do you actually have an argument, Floo?

Nevill Francis Mott (1905–1996): Mott, an Anglican, was a Nobel Prize-winning physicist known for explaining the effect of light on a photographic emulsion.[143] He was baptized at 80 and edited Can Scientists Believe?.

Arthur Leonard Schawlow (1921–1999): Arthur Shawlow was an American physicist who is best remembered for his work on lasers, for which he shared the 1981 Nobel Prize in Physics. Shawlow was a "fairy Orthodox Protestant." In an interview, he commented regarding God: "I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life."

Now logically your question does not make sense. Unless you are saying someone educated who is a Christian can believe in God but not the bible. We all wait with bated breath for you to explain that one...

[Sassy]

What's with the 'all' Sassy? Trying to suggest that everyone else agrees with your view of other people's posts is a common ploy of yours. Your posts generally are difficult to understand and take some working out in order to respond.

Cue the attempt to belittle my postings .....

Is that it? The only reply you can make is to whether you and other atheists might be referring to and if you can understand my posts? Nothing to support what I said about Shaker and what all other believers believe about his posts?

Nothing to belittle posting at all. It is a fact that the evidence shows that atheists in general insult, attack and with sarcasm when they cannot answer the actual contents of the post. Just as you just did by false accusations and responding to the person not the actual contents and claiming something not done.
If you really wanted to prove my original post about Shaker wrong you needed to show the contents of the post I replied to to be different from what I claimed.

1, You cannot show any difference.

2. You knew it and you knew what I said was correct and about the post in general.

Pity you cannot see anything but the way you atheist like to attack the person and not the post content.
Your post content has been replied to and shown to be faulty in that you could not prove me wrong about Shakers post.

[Sassy]

Your posts don't usually make sense, and it is your use of the English language which is at fault much of the time!

Not in your case it is your lack of knowledge of the subject and especially the bible in this case.
Had you known the bible you would know your understanding is faulty.


17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

The reason for the attack of Alan and for the ignorance of reasoning by those on the thread is clearly shown in this passage.
Alan is wise by the worlds standards and that of the wisdom of God. Your inability to understand is clear in the bible and really has nothing to do with English written or spoken.

I suppose sometimes you and the others just have to admit... God is always right and you are always wrong when it comes to being fore warned about the truth amongst believers in an unbelieving world and forum where unbelievers post.
Worldly attacks cannot prevail against the faith of those whom God knows and loves. He loves you too, but you don't know him so lack wisdom in these matters. Even your worldly education is of no use in these matters. Alan being educated is not what makes him a believer... It is a wisdom you can never have without knowing God and believing his words.

[Sassy]

I quoted my qualifications in response to the implication in one of your posts that I was not capable of writing computer software!

I admit that I do not have the time or space to fully develop my arguments in the posts I make on this forum.  I am sure I could do a better job if I was writing another thesis.  So you rightly point out the gaps and inconsistencies which are apparent in my posts.

There is a wealth of literature available on the subjects of human perception and the conflicts between free will and determinism.  These subjects are very deep.  So what I have done give an overview of my own thoughts, which go much deeper than the content of my posts.  What I am trying to do is encourage people to think about the reality of our existence and what it is comprised of. (sorry for the tautology again, but you know my meaning).  I would hope that people will come to realise that there is much more to reality that what can be defined in material science.

You do know you are talking to a teenager don't you Alan?
In fact I believe most of his arguments come from other forums and books he has read. Some are not really arguments but end up arguments about education etc.

When he told us some time ago he was 17 I understood that he felt this to be something of a burden people not taking him seriously. Unless of course Blue not being serious when he said 17. 

Again had Bluehillside been educated in the teachings of the bible he would know the knowledge and wisdom imparted by God to believers is not to be found in the academic world of knowledge. That a person who has both is far more capable than the person who has only one. That the people like Blue will always be left wanting...

[Sassy]

For Bluehillside,

Neuroscience... Give us a short detailed informative post on the actual subject.
Show us how you believe it takes away any free will and choice from the person.
Then explain why some believe in God and some don't and what proof you have that it is controlled by the brain.

You see the use Neuroscience does not explain why belief in God would manifest in the body of the sick being cured
from diseases which kill and cannot be cured in advanced stages.

I am interested in hearing what you really have learned and what you can actually prove.

You see, the emperors new clothes does not work with me. The wisdom of God can seek out and destroy human reasoning.
Show us how the body heals by the faith of a person in their brain. What happens with the brain of the believer?
More importantly...why...

[floo]

Praying can sometimes bring about healing for mind or body, but there is no evidence that there is any deity doing the business on the other end of the prayer line. It is likely that prayer acts as a placebo from time to time, imo!