Will God Ever Die?

[Coyote]

Wrong.

Whenever we talk to another person we are empirically aware of the energy or their spirit.

We are also aware of the mass of their spirit, as it always eminates from their physical presence and nowhere else.

That is compelling evidence that a person's spirit is connected with both their mass and their energy and is thus material in origin.

What there is simply no evidence of any kind is that one's spirit can ever exist outside of one's mass and energy.

There doesn't seem to be any emperical evidence that there is any such thing as a "spirit" - all of your "compelling evidence" seems like nothing more then your opinion and personal observations...

 

[ArmChair General]

Again, you add nothing of substance to the discussion.

You simply erroneously criticize as a means of attempting to hide the fact that you have nothing of substance to offer of your own ... or that you refuse to offer up of yourself in projective fear that others are like you and would wax critical of it.

For someone who professes to know physics, you are rather behind in the times.

Now stop "grading our papers", professor ... and submit one of your own ... or you will fail this class for lack of presentation.

She destroyed your pitiful attempt at an argument thats what she did.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Again, you add nothing of substance to the discussion.

You simply erroneously criticize as a means of attempting to hide the fact that you have nothing of substance to offer of your own ... or that you refuse to offer up of yourself in projective fear that others are like you and would wax critical of it.

For someone who professes to know physics, you are rather behind in the times.

Now stop "grading our papers", professor ... and submit one of your own ... or you will fail this class for lack of presentation.

Well, behind the times or not, at least I'm not incoherent, nor am I postulating wildly and refusing to provide anything to support my positions. Using a misinterpretation of a famous equation to shore up your dubious notions wasn't very effective.

Trying to reduce vast complex concepts into cute, little yes or no answers adds credence to Coyote's idea that you must be 14. If I fail the class I'll challenge because the course work was not only vague and contradictory, but it was poorly prepared and even more poorly presented. Given a rational question and a clear set of definitions from which to work, I will be able to turn out a paper on this subject of 8000-10000 words, with footnotes, and I will get an A in the course. And it won't even be the first time I have done so.

 

[Chip]

There doesn't seem to be any emperical evidence that there is any such thing as a "spirit" - all of your "compelling evidence" seems like nothing more then your opinion and personal observations...

No, there is likely no classical empirical evidence of our spirit.

Therefore our spirit does not exist ... right?

No.

If we were talking about atoms and asteroids, then lack of empirical evidence is of value.

But the lack of that which is material to participate in the provision of empirical evidence of the spiritual is irrelevant to the ontological experience of one's self.

The being which each of us is transcends our empirically detectable material.

When we say "I am" we aren't talking about our matter in whole or in part, we're talking about our entity as a being, upon which it is impossible to put our finger.

I can't help but wonder if your reluctance to accept the spiritual is due to abuse at the hands of the religious, the religious who know not that of which they speak.

Perhaps, though, we may one day find a way of discerning the spirit empirically. We know now that sub-atomic particles emit a wave of massless energy. We also know now that sub-atomic quantum mechanical processes of a very special nature are at work in the brain.

Perhaps it's only a matter of time before we can link the physical to the non-physical.

In the meantime, does it really matter?

After all, no one's going anywhere -- when we biologically die, quantum mechanics strongly suggests that we spiritually die as well.

And that thought can be pretty scary ... scary enough to cause denial of the very existence of that which we are.

 

[bododie]

What do you suppose sustains God in the first place, that He could die?

 

[Chip]

What do you suppose sustains God in the first place, that He could die?

I haven't a clue.

I wish I did.

I don't feel particularly sustained by the thought of my death.

It's actually pretty scary ...

... Even though I trust God that all, even death, is as it should be, and, contrary to some religious mythology, no particular horrors await.

But if God could die, that changes things a bit.

It's like discovering our parents aren't gods, but imperfect -- it reduces our security somewhat when we discover this as kids.

God may be the only reason cosmological nothing does not "exist".

But all that is and has been alive that I've ever observed eventually dies.

Is God mortal too?

Is existence itself also mortal?

Is God merely so large that his life is so long compared to ours that he just looks immortal?

And if God can really die, then, like all others that die, something must have created God ... in which case is God thus not really God?

My tendency is to conclude that if God was not created by something/someone else, then God is immortal.

Otherwise, God is not.