Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:13 am
Greta, As a secularist you must believe that the living machine on earth which eats itself and reproduces is a result of accident. Even though the laws of chance make this impossible, it will not cause you to doubt this belief.
Yet I have never claimed that everything is accidental, and do not think it's any more accidental than growing from zygote to adult.
Nick_A wrote:It is far more reasonable that organic life as a whole exists as an idea, as a potential within a higher cosmos. Cosmic need created the necessity for this conscious potential to manifest as phenomenon or this living machine serving its cosmic purpose.
The "higher cosmos" is an invention. There is one cosmos. To split parts of the cosmos into two and declare them "higher" and "lower" without a skerrick of backup, reasoning, logic or evidence is not good enough.
Before you introduce your usual array of "secular" insults that I "don't understand", if you provided some kind of reasoning and presented ideas as possibilities rather than Nick's Eternal Higher Knowledge
, I would respond very differently. The lack of humility or reasoning in your posts is, well, simply a very naive attempt at philosophy.
Further, to posit that the virgin birth is real from this inherently weak position that is simply superstitious, nothing more.
Nick_A wrote:You believe in an impossible accident and I believe in conscious intent. You believe an impossible accident is more reasonable than conscious intent within a conscious universe. If you seriously believe in this impossible accident I’ve got a bridge for sale here in Brooklyn you will want to buy.
If organic life can manifest on earth by conscious intent, is there any reason why, when lawful conditions allow, an evolved soul cannot without the need for the sex act be born from a woman whose purity allows it?
We have only ever spoken about what you believe. You have never asked me what I believe. So you have no idea what I believe. I can narrow it down for you - your assumptions about my "beliefs" so far have all been wrong. Every one. I am actually heavily into personal spirituality, which is why I see your boastings as so obviously bogus and abstracted mythology, but I don't much talk about it because no one is interested and it is, after all, personal
. Not something to be sullied by all this
However, just as I don't believe in Noah's Ark or demonic possession (except by bacteria, viruses and prions) I don't believe in virgin births in humans unless the sperm is delivered by hand or IVF. It's ironic that snakes are probably the animal kingdom's greatest virgin birthers, is it not?
Humans, however, require impregnation by packages of a male's DNA to fertilise the eggs. How do you postulate a mechanism behind the delivery of DNA and fertilisation from God to Mary via the "higher cosmos"?