TheBigUrban2:


The mind is the brain and the brain is very physical.

Sharrap

Seriously, do you accept this to be true?

Reyginus: Seriously, do you accept this to be true?

Yes

TheBigUrban2:


Yes

Good for you, bro. The mind is the brain!!

[b][/b]

Reyginus: Good for you, bro. The mind is the brain!!

the brain is the mind

cyrexx:

For one, we don't know if it BEGIN to exist or it has ALWAYS BEEN.

Even if it began to to exist, it might have begun as a non-complex information at first and increasing get more complex over the generations.

My answer.
If it began as complex as this.(Please note that I said if it BEGAN ...), then a creative mind (who must have been designed by a more creative and more complex mind) must have brought it to be.

Let me see if I get you correctly; You are saying that if immaterial information/mind starts out as complex then it must have been created by a creative mind which itself must have in turn been created.

Have I accurately represented your answer?

striktlymi: A belief in God is not needed to hold the view that all men are equal. The fact that we vary in terms of strength, size, abilities etc gives credence to the fact that men aren't actually equal.

Matter of factly I do not hold the view that all men are equal though I believe firmly that all men need to be respected and treated fairly irrespective of the glaring inequalities.

It matters not whether we look at it with respect to Faith or Logic because no matter how we look at it, we will always arrive at the same conclusion: All men are definitely not equal. Some are gifted more than others.

What reasons do you have for holding the position that the unequal beings ought to be treated as if they are equal?

MrAnony1:
What reasons do you have for holding the position that the unequal beings ought to be treated as if they are equal?

Everyone deserves to be treated with fairness because we are first and foremost humans. This is what we are before we start analysing the capabilities or inadequacies of individuals.

striktlymi:

Everyone deserves to be treated with fairness because we are first and foremost humans. This is what we are before we start analysing the capabilities or inadequacies of individuals.

Come, Let Us Reason Together ( Isaiah 1:18 )


You are right on but even Jesus called a Syrophoenician woman a "dog" because she was not a Jew.( mark 7:25-30; see also Matthew 15:21-28). This smirks of racism to me. Matthew 10:5-6 : "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (KJV).

John 4:22 Jesus said: You people worship what you do not understand. We worship what we understand, because salvation is of the Jews. KJV.
You get it? All the Gentiles, the Syrophoenician and the Samaritans worship what they don't understand "because salvation is of the Jews."

Yes, it is true. Christ said these things. So he treated people differently based at least on race. If you are an outsider like the Syrophoenician lady you are a "dog." And if you an ordinary gentile or a Samaritan, he would speak in parables to confuse you so you would not be saved:

Mark 4:11-12 Jesus said to them, to you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to outsiders, all these things are done in parables: That they may see, and not perceive; and they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

striktlymi:
Everyone deserves to be treated with fairness because we are first and foremost humans. This is what we are before we start analysing the capabilities or inadequacies of individuals.

What is it specifically about humans that makes them deserve equal treatment?

omonuan:

Come, Let Us Reason Together ( Isaiah 1:18 )


You are right on but even Jesus called a Syrophoenician woman a "dog" because she was not a Jew.( mark 7:25-30; see also Matthew 15:21-28).

Jesus did not call her a dog. Those are your words. Jesus made an illustration to drive home a message. That is different from calling someone a dog. If you want us to reason together then avoid misrepresenting 'facts'.

The fact here was that Jesus had a mission to convert the people of the promise. God made a covenant with the people of Israel which more or less made them a favoured people from whom the promised messiah would come from.

The messiah is meant to take away the 'sins' of the world and not just the sins of the Israelites, though the first point of contact was Israel. Israel first then the rest of the world. This way of reaching out to others from a selected few is really not uncommon. It is done in our world everyday and it is actually quite an effective approach.

omonuan:
This smirks of racism to me.

If you say it seems like favouritism I may agree with you because it seems exactly that but racism? Nah, I don't agree. If Jesus was a racist he wouldn't have sent Paul and the other disciples to the gentiles.

omonuan:
Matthew 10:5-6 : "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (KJV).

John 4:22 Jesus said: You people worship what you do not understand. We worship what we understand, because salvation is of the Jews. KJV.
You get it? All the Gentiles, the Syrophoenician and the Samaritans worship what they don't understand "because salvation is of the Jews."

If salvation is only for the people of Israel, why then did Christ bother to convert the Gentiles?

omonuan:
Yes, it is true. Christ said these things. So he treated people differently based at least on race. If you are an outsider like the Syrophoenician lady you are a "dog." And if you an ordinary gentile or a Samaritan, he would speak in parables to confuse you so you would not be saved:

Mark 4:11-12 Jesus said to them, to you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to outsiders, all these things are done in parables: That they may see, and not perceive; and they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

The above still a misrepresentation because that statement was not only directed at the Gentiles. It also included the people of Israel. The Apostles were the only ones Jesus explained the parables to but not others.

MrAnony1:
What is it specifically about humans that makes them deserve equal treatment?

Humans deserve to treat each other fairly because we are of thesame kind.

MrAnony1:

Let me see if I get you correctly; You are saying that if immaterial information/mind starts out as complex then it must have been created by a creative mind which itself must have in turn been created.

Have I accurately represented your answer?

Yes.

striktlymi:

Humans deserve to treat each other fairly because we are of thesame kind.

I am afraid it is difficult to follow your reasoning let me explain why

1. You believe that humans are NOT equal in any way. Therefore you believe that to say that all humans are equal is a lie

2. You believe we should treat them as if they were equal irrespective of the "fact" that they are not equal.

3. Essentially what you are saying is that even though we know the truth we must uphold a lie.

You will need to give a good reason for us to affirm (what you believe to be) a lie. Which is what is required of you.

Merely telling us that they are human really doesn't cut it because it doesn't explain to us anything about the equality of humans which is what the question is really about.

So I ask again, what is it about humans that makes it necessary to affirm a lie about them? Why should we pretend that humans are equal if they really aren't?

MrAnony1:

Let me see if I get you correctly; You are saying that if immaterial information/mind starts out as complex then it must have been created by a creative mind which itself must have in turn been created.

Have I accurately represented your answer?

cyrexx:
Yes.

Good. Now let us examine your answer:

First of all, I think you have made some ad hoc modifications to your answer but I'll roll with it anyway.

I will draw your attention to two phrases and ask some clarification questions?

1. "if immaterial information/mind began as complex...." Would you hold that if information starts out simple and becomes increasingly complex, then it is possible that there is no mind behind it

2. ".....a creative mind which itself must have in turn been created" Would you hold that it is impossible for an uncreated creative mind to exist?

MrAnony1:

I am afraid it is difficult to follow your reasoning let me explain why

I believe it's pretty straight forward.

MrAnony1:
1. You believe that humans are NOT equal in any way. Therefore you believe that to say that all humans are equal is a lie

* Yes, I do hold that humans are not equal.

* I do not conclude that those who hold a contrary view are lying. I take it as their opinion. Unless you are taken me for a 'liar' for expressing my opinion.

MrAnony1:
2. You believe we should treat them as if they were equal irrespective of the "fact" that they are not equal.

No! That was not my expression. I said everyone deserves to be treated fairly. Fairness need not mean equality.

MrAnony1:
3. Essentially what you are saying is that even though we know the truth we must uphold a lie.

That's what you are implying. I am not responsible for the implications you decide to draw from my comments.

MrAnony1:
You will need to give a good reason for us to affirm (what you believe to be) a lie.

My opinions are actually not directed at wanting peeps to hold my view and you have every right to believe that my view is a lie. Simply your opinion!

MrAnony1:
Merely telling us that they are human really doesn't cut it because it doesn't explain to us anything about the equality of humans which is what the question is really about.

I didn't set out to explain the equality of humans. I actually hold that humans aren't equal for very obvious reasons, some of which were enumerated in the OP; and quite frankly, I don't think the 'principle' of fair treatment for members of the same specie is difficult to understand.

MrAnony1:
So I ask again, what is it about humans that makes it necessary to affirm a lie about them? Why should we pretend that humans are equal if they really aren't?

The above is a misrepresentation of my comments. You should be in the best position to explain the implications you drew from my comments.

striktlymi:

Jesus did not call her a dog. Those are your words. Jesus made an illustration to drive home a message. That is different from calling someone a dog. If you want us to reason together then avoid misrepresenting 'facts'.

The fact here was that Jesus had a mission to convert the people of the promise. God made a covenant with the people of Israel which more or less made them a favoured people from whom the promised messiah would come from.

The messiah is meant to take away the 'sins' of the world and not just the sins of the Israelites, though the first point of contact was Israel. Israel first then the rest of the world. This way of reaching out to others from a selected few is really not uncommon. It is done in our world everyday and it is actually quite an effective approach.



If you say it seems like favouritism I may agree with you because it seems exactly that but racism? Nah, I don't agree. If Jesus was a racist he wouldn't have sent Paul and the other disciples to the gentiles.




If salvation is only for the people of Israel, why then did Christ bother to convert the Gentiles?




The above still a misrepresentation because that statement was not only directed at the Gentiles. It also included the people of Israel. The Apostles were the only ones Jesus explained the parables to but not others.

The bible is not open to interpretation

- 2 Peter 1:20-21:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost. KJV

◄ Revelation 22:16 ►

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book."

Unlike you, I don't do private interpretation of the Bible. I knew one of you would show up to give your own private interpretation of several concise statements attributed to Christ. You appear to be one of those who regularly say that the bible does not mean what it says, it says what you mean but beware of the admonitions.

In the context of the use of Dog to refer to Syrophoenician woman, it is obvious Christ used the "dog" comparison to her. I guess you are proud of Christ using a derogatory term for a woman in need.

I can't help but notice that you've bought into the balderdash that the Jews and Israel are chosen. For a chosen people God sure found one of the most desolate and wretched places in the world for them. He did not even give them water to drink nor peace. The biblical proportion war is still raging till date. So much for being chosen people. Do you really think that Israel was more chosen than Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or U.A.E. not to talk of the good ole USA?

Here is what Paul said: "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:"
Thessalonians 2:14-15.

So which one is right statement about the Jews by the Bible? "chosen" by God or "they please not God?" Which is the gospel truth? Are the Jews "contrary to all men:" as Paul said?

Paul went on to call them murderers for allegedly Killing Christ:

Acts 7:52:
"Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:"

If Christ came to fulfill the book and save us from our sins why would Paul call Jews murderers for helping him accomplish what was preordained? How does this square with God saying that Israel and Jews are chosen?

I did not know that Paul was a disciple of Christ and that Christ sent him to the Gentiles. I know that Paul says that it is okay to lie to help Christianity "For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" – St. Paul, Romans 3.7. Paul is a self acclaimed liar.

Paul says to the Colossians: “Do not lie to one another.” (Colossians 3:9). And yet, Paul himself is not committed to truth. Instead, he justifies telling lies to the Philippians: “The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached.” (Philippians 1:18). He even openly boasts of being a deceiver to the Corinthians: “Crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery!” (2 Corinthians 12:16).


It is a truism that Christ said salvation is of the Jews. Do not blame the messenger blame the message.

I see that you are proud that Christ would use parables to confuse people so that they wont be saved. Does it really matter that Jews were also included in his outsiders? That a "savior" would confuse people in order for them not to be saved should be of more concern to you than anything else.

MrAnony1:



Good. Now let us examine your answer:

First of all, I think you have made some ad hoc modifications to your answer but I'll roll with it anyway.

I will draw your attention to two phrases and ask some clarification questions?

1. "if immaterial information/mind began as complex...." Would you hold that if information starts out simple and becomes increasingly complex, then it is possible that there is no mind behind it

2. ".....a creative mind which itself must have in turn been created" Would you hold that it is impossible for an uncreated creative mind to exist?

1. Yes, it is highly possible.

2. If we follow the logic that everything requires a creator. Then yes, the creator mind also could not have been uncreated. If we follow the logic that some realities or elements of nature has always existed, then the creative mind and the informations MAY have always been existing.

TheBigUrban2: [b][/b]

the brain is the mind

It seems you would like to stretch this further. Let me see if this would work. Please just take it lightly with me.

What do you think is responsible for the build-up of thoughts in the brain? What makes you to even consider to think of anything at all?

TheBigUrban2: I just watched a video where a christian claimed that it is only a belief in God that can truly cement that belief that all men are equal. The christian claimed that men have their differences in size, intelligence, strength and contributions to society.The only solution to these differences is to believe that God created all men equal.


This same argument was propounded by Anony, who then went forward to assert that atheism or atheists can not hold that all men are equal due to a lack of belief in God.


However, I want to rebut this argument. Logic alone can show us that all men are equal-

First of all, science tells us that all humans have the same basic make up, the same basic body parts and we are the same species. The differences in men mostly come from the effects of the environment. Furthermore, all humans come from the same mother- the mitrochondrial Eve.

All men have equal potential. The problem is that our environment, our experiences and upbringing are thing the things that make us unique. We were all foolish from the womb as babies. I am yet to see any human being that was intelligent as a baby. The inequality starts with the environment; breastfeeding as a baby, your teachings as a child, the prosperity of your society, the wealth of your parents, guardian etc.

In theory we are all equal as men and women. Unfortunately our environment makes it for some men to be more equal than others.




God is not necessary for a belief in equality. In fact, if we were to be honest, the Abrahamic God of Jews, Christians and Muslims advocates the inequality of man. For instance, Yaweh puts isreal as his chosen people- Isrealites are more important than other humans. Allah is best understood in Arabic and focuses mostly on the Middle Eastern men.

hehehe, i think intelligence is actually a inherited ability, it depends on the chromosomes you received not on the enviroment.

How come some are born more intelligent, some are born deformed and yet an atheist who claims to be reason only think that all men are created/born equal.

Your conclusion doesn't necessary follow your lack of faith, and i seem to agree with anony that the sure truth of human equality is most defended by religion not by "the atheist mind".

An atheist is more likely to support the killing of the deformed and suffering than a christian.

Ubenedictus:

hehehe, i think intelligence is actually a inherited ability, it depends on the chromosomes you received not on the enviroment.

The above does support the belief that every man is equal either from the Atheist stand point or that of Religion.

Ubenedictus:
How come some are born more intelligent, some are born deformed and yet an atheist who claims to be reason only think that all men are created/born equal.

If indeed human intelligence is a characteristic that is 'acquired' from birth then it necessarily follows that inequality in human intelligence means inequality of humans themselves.

Ubenedictus:
Your conclusion doesn't necessary follow your lack of faith, and i seem to agree with anony that the sure truth of human equality is most defended by religion not by "the atheist mind".

I agree that his argument, in my opinion, does not support equality from an Atheist point of view but neither does yours support it from the 'Religious' angle.

Ubenedictus:
An atheist is more likely to support the killing of the deformed and suffering than a christian.

I do not agree. Some Christians support that dreadful act. Some Atheists are against abortion too.

@ubenedictus you are wrong to say that atheists are more likely to kill a deformed person: in the first place who created the deformed child?

Here is the law according to the bible: "yet because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary. I am the LORD, who makes them holy.'" ◄ Leviticus 21:23 ► it would appear from this that God does not like the people he created with defect.

He does not want them to "desecrate" his sanctuary with their defect!

"For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken. No man that hath a blemish of the seed of Aaron the priest shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the Lord made by fire: he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God." (Leviticus 21:18-21).

These are in the Bible so don't ignore them. Notice that those of you who wear glasses are doomed for you "hath a blemish" in your eye. You better not approach God's sanctuary lest you desecrate it. A man that "hath his stones broken" should not be near the sanctuary. So if you have erectile dysfunction, no sanctuary for you or Lord's sanctuary would be desecrated with your "broken stones."

cyrexx:

Don't go until you define the more complex mind that must have created this your Deist God. Or else the logic you used to arrive at this conclusion is fatally faulty.

Usual atheist trick of asking for the creator of an uncaused God while asserting that the universe is uncaused.

donroxy:

.... I believe Advancement in these knowledge can build consciousness into a system (computer) ........

This is physically impossible under the current laws of nature. Consciousness (ie the knowledge of one's existence etc ) is first and foremost immaterial and it is something that man can't manipulate.

MrAnony1:

He does:

https://www.nairaland.com/1814905/all-men-equal-under-god/1#24732052

I also don't think that he is wrong to say that software is immaterial.

In computer systems, the software is very much material. This is somewhat true of aspects of our consciousness (eg the five senses) as they are encoded for in neural circuitry in the brain.

cyrexx:

Which answer given by which religion among myriads of religion?

Many religions believe that the universe had a beginning. Lemme start with pagan religions such as that of Ifa.

cyrexx: Isn't it funny that the religion of your parents just happens to be right one. And all others are wrong.

I turned Christian while my parents where pagans. Pick another fish witj that worn-out point of yours.

cyrexx: I know about Multiverse Theory . Interesting. But I must ask which of your prophets or holy book authors ever conceived this in his wildest imaginations, before the scientists brought it to fore?

Everyone of them. You see. When the wor universe was coined it was used to mean alll possible galatic bodies, everything that could ever exist. Ancient men were welll awae that there were possibly worlds and bodies their instruments couldnt catch. As telescopes became more sophisticated the word 'uinverse'was then used to describe the system of galaxies our telescopes can see. The worl multiverse simply means what 'universe' meant in the past, with the added notion that there COULD be life on other universes.

Reyginus: It seems you would like to stretch this further. Let me see if this would work. Please just take it lightly with me.

What do you think is responsible for the build-up of thoughts in the brain? What makes you to even consider to think of anything at all?

biochemistry....the brain is responsible for thoughts. What more you want?

UyiIredia: In computer systems, the software is very much material. This is somewhat true of aspects of our consciousness (eg the five senses) as they are encoded for in neural circuitry in the brain.

The coding actually is just numbers and algorithm in cyberspace.....very immaterial

Ubenedictus:



An atheist is more likely to support the killing of the deformed and suffering than a christian.

Any figures to back up the bold? Or are you just telling us your bigoted opinion?

Hitler alone is an exception to the bold



Secular nations that have a lot of atheists tend to be more peaceful and developed than religious ones.

Ubenedictus:

hehehe, i think intelligence is actually a inherited ability, it depends on the chromosomes you received not on the enviroment.

.

Intelligence is also dependent on environment.

Just because you have smart parents, it doesnt necessarily mean that you will be smart

TheBigUrban2:


The coding actually is just numbers and algorithm in cyberspace.....very immaterial

So the chips containing firma\ware software on a device are immaterial ? Windows CDs are also immaterial?! PAthetic. Bros Seun abeg helep me tell these guys say software are material.

TheBigUrban2:
Any figures to back up the bold? Or are you just telling us your bigoted opinion?

i could get the figures, but i can't multi task on my phone.

Beside by opinion isn't based on bigotry. You guys believe man is a product of some universal chance, in essence, man is not essentially better than animals, he just has a bigger and better brain.

It is science that one of the best ways to keep a population healthy (whether animal or human) is to make sure that the most healthy mates with the most healthy and the sick are left to die of. Eugenics make more sense from an atheistic perspective.

A guy who believes he is a product of chance is probably gonna support the killing of the sick and deformed than the guy who believes human life is sacred.

Besides you demostrated in the euthanasia thread that you don't care injecting a lethal substance in a living person, put simply you don't care killing him because pain trumps life.

Hitler alone is an exception to the bold

exceptions don't break the rule,
...besides it is posible that hitler was a closet atheistic with a religious pr.

Secular nations that have a lot of atheists tend to be more peaceful and developed than religious ones.

oh tell me about it!

Ubenedictus:

How come some are born more intelligent, some are born deformed and yet an atheist who claims to be reason only think that all men are created/born equal.

Your conclusion doesn't necessary follow your lack of faith, and i seem to agree with anony that the sure truth of human equality is most defended by religion not by "the atheist mind".

We are all born with equal potential. No one is born intelligent. One might have the intelligent genes but they are useless if not harnessed with quality education


People born with deformities are usually a result of parents' negligence or ignorance towards childbirth

Down syndrome is a result of having children at old age and also an extra chromosome....there is testing from down syndrome before the baby is born.


Anyhoo, we are all the same specie, according to science. We are equal in that sense.