Meaning of John 6:43-44

[5wize]

Of course there is the same revelation. I guess one has to have it before onf knows it in others

I agree. Applewhite shared it with his flock. Koresh shared it with his. Rajneesh shared one with his flock. Big list of folks with shared revelations.

 

[Gus Bovona]

I have a bee in my bonnet about the colour thing. Because our physiology is more or less the same, would it not be reasonable to conclude that my experience of blue would be more or less the same as anyone else's?

I guess I’m OK with that inference but at the most it is just an inference.

 

[Whatsisface]

I guess I’m OK with that inference but at the most it is just an inference.

I don't know how it could be proven, but my thinking is that the cones in our eyes that respond to different wavelengths of light are very much the same person to person in their sensitivity and response, as are the nerves and part of the brain that produces the sensation of sight. That they would be randomly different seems unlikely.

Interesting that the colour red is associated with alarm whilst blues and greens are more calming. My understanding is that the ideal colour for hospital interiors is considered green, in part for its calming effect. If we all saw different colours for a particular wavelength, these conventions wouldn't come about.

 

[Caroljeen]

Oh my gosh I sure did. I read that book six ways to Thursday.

Have you written a book on scientism?

 

[Caroljeen]

The problem you have is that mankind has been extremely successful doing just that. All the technology you see around you, and indeed use to post here, is thanks to science disregarding the supernatural with that swift flick. We no longer think thunder is God angry, or whatever.

Rejecting the supernatural has a long track record of success, and the "we don't know" has a long history of becoming science.

I'm not rejecting science and its benefits to humans and the planet we live on. It doesn't explain everything and there are things that it can't address at all. Science cannot explain every thing.

 

[Gus Bovona]

Have you written a book on scientism?

No, I haven't. Not sure that that is in the cards, but maybe it's an idea that's worth percolating. I'd have to do some study to see what else in out there so I'd be able to say something new. I've read a few things (Coyne, Carroll, Carrier). What's with the C's? That kills it right there, my last name doesn't start with a C.

 

[Caroljeen]

Not just plumbing, but we have landed a man on the moon, we have electric cars, we have the internet, we have the genome project, we have a survival rate for cancer of over 50%. All these things are built on science. All of them illustrate how successful science is - how successful disregarding the supernatural with that swift flick is.

How many of these inventors and scientists believe in God? Do you think Francis Collins gave up his faith in God after he finished working on the Human Genome project?

 

[Caroljeen]

No, I haven't. Not sure that that is in the cards, but maybe it's an idea that's worth percolating. I'd have to do some study to see what else in out there so I'd be able to say something new. I've read a few things (Coyne, Carroll, Carrier). What's with the C's? That kills it right there, my last name doesn't start with a C.

Way to talk yourself out of it!

Are those named persons all leaders in Scientism?

 

[Gus Bovona]

Are those named persons all leaders in Scientism?

There's no movement that identifies like that, but all of them - biologist Jerry Coyne, physicist Sean Carroll, and historian Richard Carrier - have the same view about science, which I will frame this way: science is a method, a process. So, if we ask, "what other process or method beyond science gives reliable results about the objective world," I think all three of them, along with me, would say that we're unaware of anything besides science.

 

[Whatsisface]

How many of these inventors and scientists believe in God?

The higher up the academic ladder you go, particularly in philosophy and physics, the more you find people are atheists.

Do you think Francis Collins gave up his faith in God after he finished working on the Human Genome project?

No, he didn't.

I've read his account of coming to God. In the end he believes because he wants to believe because he can't face the meaningless way people die of disease, rather than because he discovered the sort of confirmable evidence for God that nailed the genome project. He wants it all to mean something, that's why he believes.

 

[Caroljeen]

The higher up the academic ladder you go, particularly in philosophy and physics, the more you find people are atheists.

Where did you find those statistics?

I've read his account of coming to God. In the end he believes because he wants to believe because he can't face the meaningless way people die of disease, rather than because he discovered the sort of confirmable evidence for God that nailed the genome project. He wants it all to mean something, that's why he believes.

I'd like to read that for myself. Was that in a book or online?

That reason may have opened his mind to God's existence but it isn't faith. He would need much more such as an encounter with God.

 

[Caroljeen]

There's no movement that identifies like that, but all of them - biologist Jerry Coyne, physicist Sean Carroll, and historian Richard Carrier - have the same view about science, which I will frame this way: science is a method, a process. So, if we ask, "what other process or method beyond science gives reliable results about the objective world," I think all three of them, along with me, would say that we're unaware of anything besides science.

By "objective world" you mean that which we understand with our senses and can be measured and tested?

 

[Whatsisface]

Where did you find those statistics?

I can't remember now, but a quick search has found this ...

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public. Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power.

Found here.

I'd like to read that for myself. Was that in a book or online?

That reason may have opened his mind to God's existence but it isn't faith.

This is a good You Tube video where he explains his reasons for belief.

Found here.

 

[Gus Bovona]

By "objective world" you mean that which we understand with our senses and can be measured and tested?

You know, the world that everyone inhabits, the world in which you have to look both ways before you cross the street, because it might be objectively true that a car is coming and might hit you; the world in which you have to pay your bills or they will turn off your utilities; etc.

 

[El Cid]

Now that’s a different question, and it depends on which aspect of love you mean. We can’t use my wife’s internal subjective feeling as evidence for much of anything for the reasons I’ve stated above. She can say that she has those feelings, certainly, but we can’t know if those feelings are what we call love, or that they are anywhere close to what other people experience when they describe their feelings as love, just like we don’t know if her internal subjective experience of blue is the same as anyone else’s.

But the external manifestations of love can be confirmed by objective evidence: her statements, her behavior, her subtle body language, etc. Those externalities might make us think we can infer what her internal subjective experience is, but only to the extent that we can say that my blue is the same as her blue.

Exactly, you only can go by her external behaviors, ie effects of her love, if she actually loves you. This is how we also determine whether God loves us as well. So Gods statements that He loves us are objective evidence for His love for us as well. Though I think some would disagree with you about your wife's statements being objective evidence. Colors are a little different because we can all agree on exactly what is blue when we see it. Love is more subjective. Something can have the universal property of blueness and it is nonphysical. So color is an example of something else that is nonphysical.

 

[Caroljeen]

Exactly, you only can go by her external behaviors, ie effects of her love, if she actually loves you. This is how we also determine whether God loves us as well. So Gods statements that He loves us are objective evidence for His love for us as well. Though I think some would disagree with you about your wife's statements being objective evidence. Colors are a little different because we can all agree on exactly what is blue when we see it. Love is more subjective. Something can have the universal property of blueness and it is nonphysical. So color is an example of something else that is nonphysical.

what about magnetic fields?

 

[Gus Bovona]

Exactly, you only can go by her external behaviors, ie effects of her love, if she actually loves you.

“Actually loves you” is an equivocation. Do you mean her internal subjective feeling or the outward, objective stuff, because I don’t know what a third option could be. Love is not some abstract essence, it’s just a deep human emotion that makes us feel a certain way and drives certain behaviors.

This is how we also determine whether God loves us as well. So Gods statements that He loves us are objective evidence for His love for us as well. Though I think some would disagree with you about your wife's statements being objective evidence. Colors are a little different because we can all agree on exactly what is blue when we see it.

We agree on what objects are blue, but we can’t know that our internal, subjective experience feels the same.

Love is more subjective. Something can have the universal property of blueness and it is nonphysical.

What thing is blue but is nonphysical?

So color is an example of something else that is nonphysical.

You’re just talking about a concept.

 

[El Cid]

what about magnetic fields?

Magnetic fields are physical. They can be detected using physical sensors and etc.

 

[El Cid]

Exactly, you only can go by her external behaviors, ie effects of her love, if she actually loves you.

“Actually loves you” is an equivocation. Do you mean her internal subjective feeling or the outward, objective stuff, because I don’t know what a third option could be. Love is not some abstract essence, it’s just a deep human emotion that makes us feel a certain way and drives certain behaviors.

True unconditional love often called agape love by Christians is more than just emotions, it also involves the will. But yes it does take place in the mind and is non physical so cannot proven by science. So it involves trust from what you see in the other persons behavior, so there is evidence of love.

This is how we also determine whether God loves us as well. So Gods statements that He loves us are objective evidence for His love for us as well. Though I think some would disagree with you about your wife's statements being objective evidence. Colors are a little different because we can all agree on exactly what is blue when we see it.

We agree on what objects are blue, but we can’t know that our internal, subjective experience feels the same.

We agree on what objects have the property of blueness. You dont feel blue, you perceive or observe blueness.

Love is more subjective. Something can have the universal property of blueness and it is nonphysical.

What thing is blue but is nonphysical?

Blueness itself is nonphysical.

So color is an example of something else that is nonphysical.

You’re just talking about a concept.

No, it is a property.

 

[Gus Bovona]

True unconditional love often called agape love by Christians is more than just emotions, it also involves the will. But yes it does take place in the mind and is non physical so cannot proven by science. So it involves trust from what you see in the other persons behavior, so there is evidence of love.

None of that address that there need be nothing more to my spouse’s love for me than her internal feelings and her external behavior. Those two things are sufficient, they account for everything.

We agree on what objects have the property of blueness. You dont feel blue, you perceive or observe blueness.

Blueness itself is nonphysical.

No, it is a property.