Searching for GOD...

[Maeght]

From 1 Corinthians 13: 4-7

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonour others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Nice bit of poetry. How does that add to the discussion though?

[Alan Burns]

Nice bit of poetry. How does that add to the discussion though?

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve more than unavoidable chemical reactions.  It involves consciously driven acts of human will.  Love not freely given is no love at all.

[Maeght]

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve more than unavoidable chemical reactions.  It involves consciously driven acts of human will.  Love not freely given is no love at all.

A piece of poetry doesn't actually tell us anything about that though.

I think you are just using free very loosely and to mean different things. What do you really mean by freely given? That you have a choice whether to love someone or not?

[Outrider]

Love is not just a state of mind.

Is it not?

It involves giving freely of oneself unconditionally for the benefit of others.

Self-sacrifice can be a byproduct of the state of mind of love, but the two are separate - one is an emotional/mental state, and the other is a characterisation of someone's behaviour.

Two profound examples:
Maximilian Maria Kolbe was a Polish Catholic priest who volunteered to die in place of a man named Franciszek Gajowniczek in the German death camp of Auschwitz.

Of every single person that stood up and put themselves on the many, many lines in all sorts of wars across the world and across history, there are innumerable examples of self-sacrifice for any number of reasons which you might characterise as, broadly, 'love' (whether for an individual, a state, a notion, a people...) across any number of philosophical positions, not just Christian or even religious.

And the second is the quote from John 10:18 where Jesus prophesies He will lay down His life of His own free will for the benefit of all mankind.

Given the fictional nature of the story, and the temporary nature of that sacrifice, and the fact that it was completely unnecessary, I'd say that's less profound an example than you think it is.

O.

[Gordon]

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve more than unavoidable chemical reactions.  It involves consciously driven acts of human will.  Love not freely given is no love at all.

Alternatively

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve IS NO* more than unavoidable chemical reactions.

*FIFY

[Alan Burns]

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve more than unavoidable chemical reactions.  It involves consciously driven acts of human will.  Love not freely given is no love at all.

You're not "pointing out" anything, you're just asserting it. And what you think love "should" involve tells you nothing about what it actually is.

So, finally, why not try at least to tell us how you get from "I don't find materialistic explanations for consciousness to be plausible" to "therefore the materialistic explanations for consciousness are totally impossible"?     

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

There are holes in the sky
Where the rain gets in
But they're ever so small
That's why the rain is thin.

Spike Milligan

Your turn...

[Stranger]

Just pointing out that our human capacity to love and be loved can and should involve more than unavoidable chemical reactions.  It involves consciously driven acts of human will.  Love not freely given is no love at all.

...and clearly running away shit scared of facing up to the question you'd been asked.

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

Another absurdly irrational claim of Christianity, that turns its God into an evil, vindictive, cruel, and malevolent monster, if one bothers to actually think about it...

[jeremyp]

Love is not just a state of mind.
It involves giving freely of oneself unconditionally for the benefit of others.

Love is a human emotion. It may lead to the latter but it certainly not something you can control with your conscious mind.

Could you stop loving Christ if you wanted? Could you stop loving your spouse, children or parents if you wanted? I'd put money on the answer to at least some of those being no. You can choose to act on your love or you can hide your love away, but you can't choose to start or stop it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

jeremyp,

Could you stop loving Christ if you wanted? Could you stop loving your spouse, children or parents if you wanted? I'd put money on the answer to at least some of those being no. You can choose to act on your love or you can hide your love away, but you can't choose to start or stop it.

If Phil Collins is to be believed, you definitely can't hurry it though...

[jeremyp]

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

That's completely screwed up. It reminds me of Prince Farquaad: "Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make."

[jeremyp]

jeremyp,

If Phil Collins is to be believed, you definitely can't hurry it though...

I think he's wrong. He should try to see it my way.

And as for this thread: do we have to keep on talking till we can't go on?

[bluehillside Retd.]

jeremyp,

I think he's wrong. He should try to see it my way.

And as for this thread: do we have to keep on talking till we can't go on?

Do you want to know a secret? Turns out all you need is love, but don’t worry if you disagree… doubtless we can work it out.

[Gordon]

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

But this is an allegedly 'omni-God' - so surely it can have as many sons as it wants?

[Alan Burns]

Another absurdly irrational claim of Christianity, that turns its God into an evil, vindictive, cruel, and malevolent monster, if one bothers to actually think about it...

And what do you believe to be that which can invoke and control the action of "bothering to actually think about it"?

[Outrider]

jeremyp,

Do you want to know a secret? Turns out all you need is love, but don’t worry if you disagree… doubtless we can work it out.

Not a problem, it's a readily available resource, given that it's all around us¹.

O.

¹ Pellow M. et al, 1994, Mercury Records

[Gordon]

And what do you believe to be that which can invoke and control the action of "bothering to actually think about it"?

This is clear begging the question, Alan - your premise that something 'invokes and controls' our thoughts is just another way of stating your preferred conclusion: 'God'.

It's probably just our biology doing what it does.

[Nearly Sane]

Not a problem, it's a readily available resource, given that it's all around us¹.

O.

¹ Pellow M. et al, 1994, Mercury Records

I'm never very sure if it's love that I feel in my fingers, or just needles and pins

[bluehillside Retd.]

Outy,

Not a problem, it's a readily available resource, given that it's all around us1.

O.

1 Pellow M. et al, 1994, Mercury Records

Perhaps AB should try some Elvis – like the rest of us, there’s a man who Can't Help Falling in Love...

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

And what do you believe to be that which can invoke and control the action of "bothering to actually think about it"?

And the fallacy top trumps continues apace. Not that you care, but that's called begging the question – a basic error in reasoning.

Again: why not try at least to tell us how you get from "I don't find materialistic explanations for consciousness to be plausible" to "therefore the materialistic explanations for consciousness are totally impossible"?     

[Stranger]

And what do you believe to be that which can invoke and control the action of "bothering to actually think about it"?

And, no matter how many times a point is addressed, the mindless, fallacy-ridden idiocy is mindlessly spewed out again, and again, and again. Every substantive counterargument just gets ignored in the pursuit of thought-free preaching.

On no account can Alan allow himself to stop and think, even for a moment, for fear that the spell is broken.

If you're absolutely determined to convince everybody that your faith is foolish nonsense that has completely crippled your ability to think rationally, then you're definitely succeeding.

[Alan Burns]

This is clear begging the question, Alan - your premise that something 'invokes and controls' our thoughts is just another way of stating your preferred conclusion: 'God'.

It's probably just our biology doing what it does.

How can I conceive of a preferred conclusion if I am unable to invoke and control the thoughts needed to reach a conclusion?

[Alan Burns]

On no account can Alan allow himself to stop and think, even for a moment, for fear that the spell is broken.

But how can I stop and think for a moment if I have no conscious control of my thoughts?

[Alan Burns]

It would seem that I am being told that if I just stop to think about it, I should reach a conclusion that I have no conscious control over what I think about.