Thoughts of Thought
The Atheist and the Evolutionist - many times one and the same - have postulated that there is no spiritual world. The physical is all there is. Why? Because that is all science can prove - the spiritual cannot be seen, touched, smelled, tasted, or heard. One question, which one of those senses does your thoughts fall into?
The anti-theistic scientist will say that your thoughts are merely chemical reactions in the brain. But our thoughts are not observed, as the other perceptions are. It is by our thoughts that we register all our other perceptions. These perceptions come to us through exterior reality, but our thoughts are internal. They do not come from outside ourselves. This is something the five senses simply cannot perceive, nor can science measure, so how can they be physical? Yes, we can test and manipulate our thoughts through fiddling with our brains, but that does not prove there is nothing more to them than chemical reactions. Science will never be able to prove whether it is the chemical reaction that causes the thoughts, or the other way around. If there is a spiritual soul, then we must conclude that it has some sort of interaction with the physical, otherwise our conscience would not be tied to our perceptive body. Merely because the physical can likewise influence our conscience does not mean there is no conscience. Only that they seem to affect each other.
But the Atheist goes one step further into his scilosophy (Philosophy masquerading as science - as it is more assertion than science) to say that since there is no conscience, and it is all based upon chemical reactions upon the brain - all a complex chemical machine - the machinations of your mind create merely the illusion of free will. You really do not have any free will. All is prearranged by the chemical reactants and inputs of the universe. All completely out of your control. (Even the thought you just thought.) But then if that is the case, a lot of issues arise.
First, if that is the case, then how can we trust our minds to be accurate? A chemical machine is simply input-output. No matter how complex. There is nothing in the universe that assures us that our mental machinations will be accurate.
Second, we all hear truth claims and decide for ourselves whether we will believe them or not. Atheists reject any truth claim that claims there is a God. Theists reject any truth claim that claims there is no God. If it is true that there is no free will, and all is simply the chemical machinations of a very complex natural machine, then there is no room to say that either side is wrong in their beliefs. They were merely wired to believe so, and there is no changing of that fact. True, there would be some that, depending upon the inputs you put in, will change from one side to the other, but then there will be those that will not, no matter what input you put in. So the Atheist would have no quarrel with the Christian. They were just wired to believe such.
Yet the new atheists are adamant about the evils of religion and any belief in such fantasies. (Not to touch on how evil is a moral statement that resides outside of the five senses….) By objecting so adamantly to the Theist, they are undermining their own foundational beliefs - unless they admit to the will. The soul. The independent free will of conscience. But then they would have to admit to the spiritual. Trapped themselves, they have.
Jared Williams
The anti-theistic scientist will say that your thoughts are merely chemical reactions in the brain. But our thoughts are not observed, as the other perceptions are. It is by our thoughts that we register all our other perceptions. These perceptions come to us through exterior reality, but our thoughts are internal. They do not come from outside ourselves. This is something the five senses simply cannot perceive, nor can science measure, so how can they be physical? Yes, we can test and manipulate our thoughts through fiddling with our brains, but that does not prove there is nothing more to them than chemical reactions. Science will never be able to prove whether it is the chemical reaction that causes the thoughts, or the other way around. If there is a spiritual soul, then we must conclude that it has some sort of interaction with the physical, otherwise our conscience would not be tied to our perceptive body. Merely because the physical can likewise influence our conscience does not mean there is no conscience. Only that they seem to affect each other.
But the Atheist goes one step further into his scilosophy (Philosophy masquerading as science - as it is more assertion than science) to say that since there is no conscience, and it is all based upon chemical reactions upon the brain - all a complex chemical machine - the machinations of your mind create merely the illusion of free will. You really do not have any free will. All is prearranged by the chemical reactants and inputs of the universe. All completely out of your control. (Even the thought you just thought.) But then if that is the case, a lot of issues arise.
First, if that is the case, then how can we trust our minds to be accurate? A chemical machine is simply input-output. No matter how complex. There is nothing in the universe that assures us that our mental machinations will be accurate.
Second, we all hear truth claims and decide for ourselves whether we will believe them or not. Atheists reject any truth claim that claims there is a God. Theists reject any truth claim that claims there is no God. If it is true that there is no free will, and all is simply the chemical machinations of a very complex natural machine, then there is no room to say that either side is wrong in their beliefs. They were merely wired to believe so, and there is no changing of that fact. True, there would be some that, depending upon the inputs you put in, will change from one side to the other, but then there will be those that will not, no matter what input you put in. So the Atheist would have no quarrel with the Christian. They were just wired to believe such.
Yet the new atheists are adamant about the evils of religion and any belief in such fantasies. (Not to touch on how evil is a moral statement that resides outside of the five senses….) By objecting so adamantly to the Theist, they are undermining their own foundational beliefs - unless they admit to the will. The soul. The independent free will of conscience. But then they would have to admit to the spiritual. Trapped themselves, they have.
Jared Williams
