Why Do the Religious Reject Science While Embracing the Impossible?

[seeds]

Ironically, the phrase "ghost in the machine" is the opposite of how we should be viewing our situation, for, in truth, it is the machine that is the ghost (illusion) relative to what lies inside the machine.

...I think the difference between your idea of God and my idea of God is that is that God is all immanent whereas your idea is that God is the same today, yesterday and forever more.

Well, I think that the main difference between our personal interpretations of the word God is that mine is Panentheistic in nature, while yours is Pantheistic in nature, with the former presuming the existence of a conscious "Agent" presiding over the universe, while the latter does not.

Anyway, with that being said, why do you assume that I believe that God is...

"...the same today, yesterday and forever more..."

...when, in fact, my idea of God is that God's living, self-aware "I Am-ness" came into existence (was "born" billions of years ago) in pretty much the same way that each of us came into existence, and has been "evolving" (growing/changing/perfecting) ever since?

Granted, I do believe that God's personal "I Am-ness" was permanently established (fixed/unchanging) from the outset, but the same also applies to our own fixed and permanent "I Am-ness."

Furthermore, seeing how I believe (from a Panentheistic perspective) that the entire material universe is situated within the closed spatial arena of God's mind and is created from the living essence of God's very being,...

...it therefore means that I too view God as being "immanent."

And that would be in precisely the same way that our human mothers were once immanent relative to us when we were previously situated within the closed spatial arena of her personal womb.

Indeed, how much more "immanent" (another word for "omnipresent") can God be - relative to our inner souls - if, in fact, our very bodies and brains are created from the living fabric of God's mind?

In other words, two humans could be locked in a romantic embrace, and God would still be closer to each of them than they are to each other.

In light of that last statement, I suggest that, unfortunately, the "immanence" or, again, the "omnipresence" of God implied in the above notion of everything in the universe being created from the living fabric of God's being,...

...is what gets mistakenly interpreted as meaning that God's "I Am-ness" (or central consciousness) is also omnipresent and is thus acutely (omnisciently) aware of literally everything taking place in the universe "all-at-once",...

...to which I propose is not only nonsense, but is one of the major stumbling blocks standing in the way to a more reasonable vision of what God may actually be.

And what is it that God may actually be?

Well, as I have been incessantly (perhaps annoyingly) shouting from the rooftops for many decades now; God (the living Creator of this universe) is simply the fully-evolved, fully-developed, fully-matured, "adult version" of what we are.
_______

[Dubious]

https://mindmatters.ai/wp-content/uploa ... Menuge.pdf

You can always depend on a theist to deliver the same BS. Mind is what the brain ponders and remembers; in short, the perspectives which the brain creates and subscribes to as experience and qualia including all its subjectivities. There is no mind without the brain's infrastructure and manufacture. The latter is the physical pedestal upon which the former is derived as content.

While the positives you write about the brain are true, the brain (i.e. material , measurable stuff) is not necessarily the basic substance. Why not claim that body is created by mind. Both are true, mind and matter. The one is not the cause of the other : each is an aspect of nature, or in God-language each is an aspect of God, or in scientific -language each is an interpretation of bare phenomena.

If one is not the cause of the other, it follows that mind can exist independently of matter. I'd like to know a single instance where that is true. Also, God-language explains absolutely nothing. God, so far, has only been an imaginary entity for which zero evidence exists; wishing it into being amounts to nothing more than a distortion of reality but people will believe what they want to believe which they always have no matter from how long ago. It's one reason why metaphysics still survives even though my version of it is very different.

[popeye1945]

I think people who become religious become so because that is what their ability is at that given time.

Isn't it more accurate to assume that people become religious due to the brain-washing indoctrination they receive soon after being born?
And regardless of the absurdity of the doctrines they are subjected to, most remain religious due to the even greater absurdity in thinking that the unfathomable order of the universe is a product of chance.

Not all people who become religious are born into it, it does seem less likely that those who are will be less likely to escape its cognitive limitations.
We are not so learned that we can be sure that our concepts properly apply to the greater universe, even if they seem suitable to our limited subjective experiences, particular to an organism and its constitution. Our senses enable us and limit us. Religion, I believe, closes the door of wonder and encourages one to accept fanciful ungrounded certainty. The focus of one's attention determines the content and quality of one's psyche, religion is very limited in its focus.

[Belinda]

I think people who become religious become so because that is what their ability is at that given time.

Isn't it more accurate to assume that people become religious due to the brain-washing indoctrination they receive soon after being born?
And regardless of the absurdity of the doctrines they are subjected to, most remain religious due to the even greater absurdity in thinking that the unfathomable order of the universe is a product of chance.

Not all people who become religious are born into it, it does seem less likely that those who are will be less likely to escape its cognitive limitations.
We are not so learned that we can be sure that our concepts properly apply to the greater universe, even if they seem suitable to our limited subjective experiences, particular to an organism and its constitution. Our senses enable us and limit us. Religion, I believe, closes the door of wonder and encourages one to accept fanciful ungrounded certainty. The focus of one's attention determines the content and quality of one's psyche, religion is very limited in its focus.

There are stages of moral growth and those stages are often linked to the person's age. The moral stage of compliance with authority normally happens in childhood. Many individuals don't progress to the next stage which is more autonomous.
Kohlberg's stages of moral development

Religious sects vary between encouraging autonomy on one hand and compliance with authority on the other. For instance Unitarians and Quakers are autonomous sects. I imagine there are anthropological 'fieldwork' -based studies into the relative authoritarianism between religious sects.

[Atla]

Now imo Europe is a sleeping giant and will stand up when really forced to do so. It can arm itself to the teeth when really necessary. This is the part that many today don't understand imo. It just would have been better to avoid this.

And there we go, this process has began yesterday. The Russian bear shouldn't have poked the European sleeping giant either.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Andrew Torba wrote something very interesting:

The great deception of our age is not that AI will replace humanity, but that it will convince us we were never more than machines to begin with. The rapid advance of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and transhumanist ideologies is forcing humanity to confront an age-old question in a new and urgent way: What does it mean to be human? For centuries, Christianity has provided a clear and unwavering answer—man is created in the image of God, possessing an immortal soul that gives him value, purpose, and an eternal destiny. Yet in the modern era, this truth is being systematically challenged.

Secular thinkers increasingly reduce human existence to a series of chemical reactions, neural impulses, and data patterns. In their view, consciousness is not a reflection of the divine but merely an advanced form of computation. According to this materialist perspective, if human thoughts, emotions, and decisions are nothing more than electrical signals in the brain, then there is no fundamental distinction between man and machine. Artificial intelligence, they argue, is simply another form of intelligence—one that can eventually surpass human cognition and render human labor, creativity, and even relationships obsolete.

This way of thinking is not merely misguided; it is profoundly dangerous. When people no longer believe in the soul, they no longer believe in the sanctity of life. If human beings are nothing more than biological machines, then they can be optimized, reprogrammed, and even discarded when they no longer serve a function. This is the foundational assumption behind transhumanism, which seeks to merge man with technology, overcoming biological limitations through genetic modification, cybernetic enhancement, and even the digital uploading of consciousness. It is a movement rooted in the false belief that man can achieve godhood by his own efforts, transcending mortality and taking control of his own evolution.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Likely because of my background in the same vein of ideas and understanding, my opposition to the “truth” presented by Monsieur BigMike arose.

The consequences of interpreting things as he does — indeed the entire school of thought — produces consequences.

Most of the sheer idiots who burped up opinions in favor of, or aligned with, the deranged and dangerous doctrines expressed by Mr Big and that are circling around (as expressed by Torba very nicely I think) seem to me to have darkened intellects and not to be aware of the dangers present in this strange, crucial time.

I regret to inform those idiots (you know who you are) that US$799.00 will be automatically deducted from your accounts as a lenient reprimand.

Idiots must not remain stupid, blind, headstrong children — you’re gonna go broke!

Do better.

[seeds]

Andrew Torba wrote something very interesting:

The great deception of our age is not that AI will replace humanity, but that it will convince us we were never more than machines to begin with. The rapid advance of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and transhumanist ideologies is forcing humanity to confront an age-old question in a new and urgent way: What does it mean to be human? For centuries, Christianity has provided a clear and unwavering answer—man is created in the image of God, possessing an immortal soul that gives him value, purpose, and an eternal destiny. Yet in the modern era, this truth is being systematically challenged.

Secular thinkers increasingly reduce human existence to a series of chemical reactions, neural impulses, and data patterns. In their view, consciousness is not a reflection of the divine but merely an advanced form of computation. According to this materialist perspective, if human thoughts, emotions, and decisions are nothing more than electrical signals in the brain, then there is no fundamental distinction between man and machine. Artificial intelligence, they argue, is simply another form of intelligence—one that can eventually surpass human cognition and render human labor, creativity, and even relationships obsolete.

This way of thinking is not merely misguided; it is profoundly dangerous. When people no longer believe in the soul, they no longer believe in the sanctity of life. If human beings are nothing more than biological machines, then they can be optimized, reprogrammed, and even discarded [sound familiar?] when they no longer serve a function. This is the foundational assumption behind transhumanism, which seeks to merge man with technology, overcoming biological limitations through genetic modification, cybernetic enhancement, and even the digital uploading of consciousness. It is a movement rooted in the false belief that man can achieve godhood by his own efforts, transcending mortality and taking control of his own evolution.

See, I told you that Musk is the "False Prophet."

Reread what ChatGPT had to say about it...

Elon Musk as the False Prophet

The False Prophet is described as a religious or ideological figure who aids the Antichrist by performing wonders and leading people astray. How could Musk fit this mold?

1. Tech as a New Religion – Musk champions transhumanism, AI, and Neuralink, concepts that could evolve into a new spiritual system—one that merges man with machine.

As your Andrew Torba pointed out...

"...It [transhumanism] is a movement rooted in the false belief that man can achieve godhood by his own efforts..."

How much more "False Prophety" can you get?

And behold how well he is aiding the Antichrist who now holds the reins of power in the Oval Office.

(Btw, most eloquent and witty, Hyperbolic Apollyon, did you listen to my song on YouTube where I mentioned your Apollyonic name in one of the verses? - https://youtu.be/Ml8n7saxDmQ)
_______

[Alexis Jacobi]

Esteemed Comrade, i sampled bit of it but, to be frank, these days I can’t bear to listen to music unless it is classical. However, I will make it a point to suffer through it soon.

[Belinda]

Likely because of my background in the same vein of ideas and understanding, my opposition to the “truth” presented by Monsieur BigMike arose.

The consequences of interpreting things as he does — indeed the entire school of thought — produces consequences.

Most of the sheer idiots who burped up opinions in favor of, or aligned with, the deranged and dangerous doctrines expressed by Mr Big and that are circling around (as expressed by Torba very nicely I think) seem to me to have darkened intellects and not to be aware of the dangers present in this strange, crucial time.

I regret to inform those idiots (you know who you are) that US$799.00 will be automatically deducted from your accounts as a lenient reprimand.

Idiots must not remain stupid, blind, headstrong children — you’re gonna go broke!

Do better.

The moral effect (Alexis Jacobi calls it "consequence") of determinism is forgiveness. However people have to keep order in society and this can be done only if we establish moral codes that delineate right and wrong. More liberal judges see more exttenuating circumstances than do more punitive judges.
Even Jesus got stroppy with certain Jews who disobeyed the moral code as propounded by Isaiah.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Huh? There cannot be a “moral effect” of determinism. Determinism is a doctrine and a perspective that undermines all that we have meant, or could mean, by this notion of morality.

However, I do understand what you are saying about taking into consideration the “extenuating circumstances”.

You fail to respond to Torba’s essential observation: the movement of the idea that man is a type of machine and not man as man has been understood to be: a being with a psyche/soul that is not body/mechanical. A being who can act morally and who has imperatives to do so.

Get stroppy?!? I am right on the point of showing you people what stroppy really means! (Hold on, I’m looking it up…)

strop•py (ˈstrɒp i)

adj.(-pi•er, -pi•est.)
Brit. Informal. bad-tempered or hostile.
[1950–55; perhaps (ob) strep (erous) + -y1]

Ok, yes, I am right on the verge of extreme obstreperousness of a sort that will roll LIKE THUNDER through this forum!

In the next 3-5 years the world we live in will be infused with AI technologies. It was strange that BigMike, let’s be truthful, came here as an amalgamation of man (this person) bolstered by an Agent AI.

Soon such Agents of AI technology will fully imitate persons. This is what on just one of the levels was so unsettling about this “BigMike”.

The Machine will begin to correct the human, and the human perspective and point-of-view. Consider what this will mean for those unlike you, Belinda, who did not grow up as you did with real people, with books and book-information, and in a human-run world!

Do you have any grasp of what this developing Brave New World will mean for those who have never been trained to reason!?

BigMike explained that he is a mathematical meat-machine. Do you understand the implications?!

[BigMike, you determined screwball, get your ass down here and let’s have it out! You are determined indeed and I am not determined. I will rewrite your overdetermined ass!]

Er-hum, allow me to continue:

(In BigMike) that Euclidean logic is harnessed to propose, explain and defend (and indoctrinate) that a man is a neuronal computing device and a “rolling rock”.

It’s happening again!!!

AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!

[Alexis Jacobi]

Belindo wrote: Even Jesus got stroppy with certain Jews who disobeyed the moral code as propounded by Isaiah.

Ultra-stroppy Yahweh then took stroppiness to a farther point and exiled them from Judea. Oh dear.

And in our present the Return of the Exiled was, let us say, engineered by willful men who, according to Judaism itself, have taken the role of God and willfully precipitated a Return that will not be allowed to stand.

Do you understand these implications?!?

Do you live in a bubble?!? Do you even have a TeeVee?!?

(Like one of those 1950 models with wabbit ears?)

You people really need to take my Course! In Book 26 of the Third Section I deal for 55 chapters on “narrative interpretation in an age of quarrel & hypocrisy”.

Dubious, you pitiable brute, how are you getting on, you nutjob?

[Belinda]

Huh? There cannot be a “moral effect” of determinism. Determinism is a doctrine and a perspective that undermines all that we have meant, or could mean, by this notion of morality.

However, I do understand what you are saying about taking into consideration the “extenuating circumstances”.

You fail to respond to Torba’s essential observation: the movement of the idea that man is a type of machine and not man as man has been understood to be: a being with a psyche/soul that is not body/mechanical. A being who can act morally and who has imperatives to do so.

Get stroppy?!? I am right on the point of showing you people what stroppy really means! (Hold on, I’m looking it up…)

strop•py (ˈstrɒp i)

adj.(-pi•er, -pi•est.)
Brit. Informal. bad-tempered or hostile.
[1950–55; perhaps (ob) strep (erous) + -y1]

Ok, yes, I am right on the verge of extreme obstreperousness of a sort that will roll LIKE THUNDER through this forum!

In the next 3-5 years the world we live in will be infused with AI technologies. It was strange that BigMike, let’s be truthful, came here as an amalgamation of man (this person) bolstered by an Agent AI.

Soon such Agents of AI technology will fully imitate persons. This is what on just one of the levels was so unsettling about this “BigMike”.

The Machine will begin to correct the human, and the human perspective and point-of-view. Consider what this will mean for those unlike you, Belinda, who did not grow up as you did with real people, with books and book-information, and in a human-run world!

Do you have any grasp of what this developing Brave New World will mean for those who have never been trained to reason!?

BigMike explained that he is a mathematical meat-machine. Do you understand the implications?!

[BigMike, you determined screwball, get your ass down here and let’s have it out! You are determined indeed and I am not determined. I will rewrite your overdetermined ass!]

Er-hum, allow me to continue:

(In BigMike) that Euclidean logic is harnessed to propose, explain and defend (and indoctrinate) that a man is a neuronal computing device and a “rolling rock”.

It’s happening again!!!

AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!

I am not optimistic about my ability to explain to you how determinism has a moral or ethical effect.



* Determinism implies that what happened necessarily happened. It follows that if Bobby intends to injure someone else he/she could not have avoided his/her impulse.

* It follows the above point that what can alter Bobby's destructive reaction tomorrow and for the foreseable future is Bobby will restrain and inhibit his/her impulse through learned empathy and learned reason.

* Morality and ethics are caused by reason and empathy.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I am not optimistic about my ability to explain to you how determinism has a moral or ethical effect.

* Determinism implies that what happened necessarily happened. It follows that if Bobby intends to injure someone else he/she could not have avoided his/her impulse.

* It follows the above point that what can alter Bobby's destructive reaction tomorrow and for the foreseable future is Bobby will restrain and inhibit his/her impulse through learned empathy and learned reason.

* Morality and ethics are caused by reason and empathy.

I really admired those bullet points! Top-notch!

I think you have completely failed to actually understand the implications of BigMike's view of man as a "rolling rock" or a molecule of water in a current.

I am, however, optimistic that you could gain such an understanding if you made the choice to do so.

I am standing by if I can help you move those neurons around!

:::moment of silent prayer:::

[God, send a beam down that lights up inside of Dear Belindo so that s/he can step out from his/her own solidified understanding and see things in a more complete light. Thank you!]

[Belinda]

I am not optimistic about my ability to explain to you how determinism has a moral or ethical effect.

* Determinism implies that what happened necessarily happened. It follows that if Bobby intends to injure someone else he/she could not have avoided his/her impulse.

* It follows the above point that what can alter Bobby's destructive reaction tomorrow and for the foreseable future is Bobby will restrain and inhibit his/her impulse through learned empathy and learned reason.

* Morality and ethics are caused by reason and empathy.

I really admired those bullet points! Top-notch!

I think you have completely failed to actually understand the implications of BigMike's view of man as a "rolling rock" or a molecule of water in a current.

I am, however, optimistic that you could gain such an understanding if you made the choice to do so.

I am standing by if I can help you move those neurons around!

:::moment of silent prayer:::

[God, send a beam down that lights up inside of Dear Belindo so that s/he can step out from his/her own solidified understanding and see things in a more complete light. Thank you!]

I think it may be true that Big Mike has not implied any moral /ethical effects caused by hard determinism. Big Mike thanked me for widening the scope of determinism to include morality/ethics. That somebody does not mention an idea does not mean they disagree with the idea.

For yourself do you understand the difference between determinism and fatalism? Do you agree that some things are more agents of change than other things?

"agents of change" means free to some degree. Determinism as the means to know stuff is a theory. It's perhaps an imaginary theory . A theory of everything which is not stochastic would be a description of God.

However from the pragmatic point of view causal determinism yields life - enhancing results in medicine, diplomacy, crime detection, pharmacology, economics, psychology, psychiatry, engineering, crime prevention, and cookery.