Doktor S wrote:Look at your life objectively, and decide for yourself what your purpose should be. Worked for me.
I am never unhappy or depressed, although I do still get pissed off sometimes
What is the difference between anger and depression?
neologist wrote:Doktor S wrote:Quote:
Hypothsis: The Scientific Search for the Soul" reveals that we do have a soul and we are born with a moral code,
Now there is some research I would be VERY interested in seeing.
I wonder what methods he used to test for 'soul'
I wonder how he defines 'moral code' and further how he demonstrates it is innate (Although for the record I do think we are born with behavioral traits, but I'm not prepared to prove it)
Very interesting stuff.
Who are you quoting, Dok? For what it's worth, Genesis explains that we do not have souls, we
are souls, as are animals.
I was quoting LightWizard.
Re: Where angels dare tread...
neologist wrote:hephzibah wrote: . . . Why did God not just kill them all off in the first place then neo? What's the point of keeping them around if they are eventually not going to be around anyway? To torment the unsuspecting? To mess with people's minds? This really does not make any sense to me.
Are you happy to have been born? If Adam and Eve had not lived, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Additionally, there are issues involving the rightfulness of God's sovereignty that have yet to be resolved.
Of course I am neo. I wasn't talking about Adam and Eve though. I was talking about lucifer and his crew...
So let's resolve the issues of rightfulness of God's sovereignty if we can... Who know's maybe it will help me out a little here....
Yes, I was serious (although some can't tell as I find part of happiness is not taking life too seriously). It doesn't even matter if one hasn't achieved what they thought they could achieve. If one looks back on their life, they might find that in almost all cases they did the right thing and made the usual mistakes we all make but accomplished some very impressive goals. Happiness isn't an illusion. Moments of sadness is not depression where one rushes to the nearest physician to get a prescription for Prozac. Eat chocolate instead. Well, not too much 'cause you may get fat and get depressed over it.
From Publishers Weekly
Nobel Prize-winning biochemist Crick (co-discoverer with James Watson of DNA's double helix structure) here takes readers to the forefront of modern brain research. Geared to serious lay readers and scientists, this speculative study argues that our minds can be explained, without recourse to religious concepts of a soul, in terms of the interactions of a vast assembly of nerve cells and associated molecules. Crick delves into the nature of consciousness by focusing on visual awareness, an active, constructive process in which the brain selectively combines discrete elements into meaningful images. Early chapters include numerous interactive illustrations to demonstrate the brain's shortcuts, tricks and habits of visual perception. In later chapters Crick discusses neural networks--electronic pathways that can "remember" patterns or produce spoken language--and outlines research strategies designed to pinpoint the brain's "awareness neurons" that enable us to see.
It's in paperback at out SHOP -- click on "books" and enter a search for "Francis Crick." w/o quotes.
Doktor S wrote:kevnmoon wrote:Believers hearts r all the time together.
All your base are belong to us!
Hehee! Doc..I didn't know you were a nerd. :wink: That cracked me up.
Spirituality is.....
a gorgeous man skating loops around me on a snowy night and the peppermint snapps that goes into the hot chocolate alter ...later..
Ehh. I dunno. I tend towards overindulging my senses and superstition. That's just the way I have chosen to roll for now. Sprituality seems to me to be an extremely practical matter. It be food of another kind.
Re: Where angels dare tread...
hephzibah wrote: . . .So let's resolve the issues of rightfulness of God's sovereignty if we can... Who know's maybe it will help me out a little here....
When he tempted Eve, Satan insinuated that God did not have man's best interests in mind.
Later, in the book of Job, Satan claimed that Job would only serve God for selfish reasons. Though he was proven wrong, Satan has not given up. Jesus reminded his followers "Simon, Simon, look! Satan has demanded to have YOU men to sift YOU as wheat." (Luke 22:31)
And again "I shall not speak much with YOU anymore, for the ruler of the world is coming. And he has no hold on me." (John 14:30)
It is our actions that prove Satan a liar.
Re: Where angels dare tread...
neologist wrote:hephzibah wrote: . . .So let's resolve the issues of rightfulness of God's sovereignty if we can... Who know's maybe it will help me out a little here....
When he tempted Eve, Satan insinuated that God did not have man's best interests in mind.
Later, in the book of Job, Satan claimed that Job would only serve God for selfish reasons. Though he was proven wrong, Satan has not given up. Jesus reminded his followers "Simon, Simon, look! Satan has demanded to have YOU men to sift YOU as wheat." (Luke 22:31)
And again "I shall not speak much with YOU anymore, for the ruler of the world is coming. And he has no hold on me." (John 14:30)
It is our actions that prove Satan a liar.
Well, that much I can still agree with. However my question still remains unanswered. Why did God not just destroy satan and his little band of followers rather than sending them here?
Lightwizard, I think there is serious clinical depression associated with brain biochemistry, but will agree that meds are possibly over-prescribed. There is a natural ebb and flow for energy to keep on keeping on, methinks, though I would guess there is some kind of bell curve for that and some do need biochem help. My ex business partner maintains well on one (don't know the name) per day, leads a rewarding life. If she skips for a few days, trouble brews.
I've been, over the years, to a variety of hells and back and don't feel that I've been clinically depressed. Just get reactive once in a while, and hibernate a bit.
I might not mind reading what Crick has to say. I read Watson's book years ago...
I am mostly a listener on these spirituality threads. I think I'm the least spiritual person on a2k, vie, I guess, if I vied, for least religious, and I come from an intensely religious background, read almost-nun. I am certainly 180 degrees from that now, forty years later, but the change happened over quite a long time, probably ten years. I'll personally quibble with the poster who said 180 degrees is dangerous, but he or she probably meant right away, dump all. Though my decade long change was heavily weighted towards the early part of the change.
Instead of dangerous, words like liberated, self empowered, personally steadied, self evolved.. come to mind, but they sound jargony, don't quite conve.
I am not only non-theist (void of theism, in my def), I am fairly non system. Buddhism has aspects that appeal to me, but even that seems like a developed rigamarole.
Whoever said something about relating to the cosmos was about there for me..
I see the fullness of ourselves, all our mental, emotonal, physical efforts... and then death, as being part of a whole, in congruence with the rest of nature. Soul, or collection of souls, is a possible word for that; I used to think so. Now I just think the "world" is very very interesting, and complexly intertwined.
flushd wrote:Doktor S wrote:kevnmoon wrote:Believers hearts r all the time together.
All your base are belong to us!
Hehee! Doc..I didn't know you were a nerd. :wink: That cracked me up.
Spirituality is.....
a gorgeous man skating loops around me on a snowy night and the peppermint snapps that goes into the hot chocolate alter ...later..
Ehh. I dunno. I tend towards overindulging my senses and superstition. That's just the way I have chosen to roll for now. Sprituality seems to me to be an extremely practical matter. It be food of another kind.
Sounds interesting flushd.
I think of that, flush'd, as sensuality, which humans share (I think) not spirituality.
I'll have to be quiet, as I re-inform myself that this thread is about angels. I'm not sure that I ever really believed in angels or satan. They were kind of in the background. I guess I liked angels because I thought them beautiful, and I still see them as primarily beautiful in religious art, or art that happens to use angels as figures. I was busy on trying to believe in the eucharist for years. (I do, I do, I do, what?, I do!)
Re: Where angels dare tread...
hephzibah wrote: . . .Well, that much I can still agree with. However my question still remains unanswered. Why did God not just destroy satan and his little band of followers rather than sending them here?
Here is where it started.
ossobuco wrote:I think of that, flush'd, as sensuality, which humans share (I think) not spirituality.
I'll have to be quiet, as I re-inform myself that this thread is about angels. I'm not sure that I ever really believed in angels or satan. They were kind of in the background. I guess I liked angels because I thought them beautiful, and I still see them as primarily beautiful in religious art, or art that happens to use angels as figures. I was busy on trying to believe in the eucharist for years. (I do, I do, I do, what?, I do!)
osso what you have to say is fine actually. This isn't just about angels. That's just the title I choose because angels are associated with spirituality. This thread is actually more about spirituality than angels or demons. Though I'm sure they have there place within this conversation.
Re: Where angels dare tread...
neologist wrote:hephzibah wrote: . . .Well, that much I can still agree with. However my question still remains unanswered. Why did God not just destroy satan and his little band of followers rather than sending them here?
Here is where it started.
Yep that is where it started alright... so are you going to answer the question? LOL
God certainly has the power to have destroyed the rebels immediately. But his power was not in question. What Satan called into dispute was the rightfulness of God's sovereignty and the integrity of his sentient creatures.
The issue may be taking what seems to us an intolerable length of time; but God's timetable is set by God, not us.
neologist wrote:The issue may be taking what seems to us an intolerable length of time; but God's timetable is set by God, not us.
Maybe he is just disorganized.......I get that way myself........like today I got up late...........and we do know god needs to rest when he has been real busy creating stuff.......
Chumly wrote:neologist wrote:The issue may be taking what seems to us an intolerable length of time; but God's timetable is set by God, not us.
Maybe he is just disorganized.......I get that way myself........like today I got up late...........and we do know god needs to rest when he has bee real busy creating stuff.......
Don't count on it. :wink:
