professor and student, on christianity.... it's really good Options

[expoised]

"LET ME EXPLAIN THE problem science has with Jesus Christ." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes, sir."
"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."
"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"
"Yes."
"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."
The professor grins knowingly. "Ahh! THE BIBLE!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."
"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could...in fact most of us would if we could....God doesn't."
[No answer]
"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"
[No answer]
The elderly man is sympathetic. "No, you can't, can you?" He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. "In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones.Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"
"Er... Yes."
"Is Satan good?"
"No."
"Where does Satan come from?"
The student falters. "From... God..."
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he?" The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking student audience. "I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen." He turns back to the Christian. "Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"
"Yes."
"Who created evil?"
[No answer]
"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness. All the terrible things - do they exist in this world? "
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"Who created them?"
[No answer]
The professor suddenly shouts at his student, "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climbs into the Christian's face. In a still small voice, he asked, "God created all evil, didn't He, son?"
[No answer]
The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn't it, young man?"
[No answer]
"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?" Pause. "Don't you?" The professor leans into the student's face again and
whispers, "Is God good?"
[No answer]
"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."
The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"
"No, sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus... in fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"
[No answer]
"Answer me, please."
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"
"No, sir."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"...yes..."
"That takes FAITH!" The professor smiles sagely at the underling. "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"
[The student doesn't answer]
"Sit down, please."
The first Christian sits...defeated.
Another Christian raises his hand. "Professor, may I address the class?"
The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, yet another Christian in the vanguard! Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering."
The Christian looks around the room. "Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I've got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."
"Is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No, sir, there isn't."
The professor's grin freezes. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The second Christian continues.
"You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 273 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than -273¡ÆC. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."
Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the classroom.
"Is there such a thing as darkness, professor?"
"That's a dumb question, son. What is night if it isn't darkness? What are you getting at...?"
"So you say there is such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes..."
"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light... but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you... give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?"
Despite himself, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him. This will indeed be a good semester. "Would you mind telling us what your point is, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error...."
The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!"
"Sir, may I explain what I mean?"
The class is all ears.
"Explain... ohhhhh, explain..." The professor makes an admirable effort to regain control. Suddenly he is affability himself. He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.
"You are working on the premise of duality," the Christian explains. "That for example there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it." The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it. "Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"
"Of course there is, now look..."
"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality. Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?" The Christian pauses. "Isn't evil the
absence of good?"
The professor's face has turned an alarming color. He is so angry he is temporarily speechless.
The Christian continues, "If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if He exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil.1 What is that work God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil."2
The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't view this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable."
The Christian replies, "I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going, Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week! Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"
The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives his student a silent, stony stare.
"Professor. Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"
"I'll overlook your impudence in the light of our philosophical discussion. Now, have you quite finished?" the professor hisses.
"So you don't accept God's moral code to do what is righteous?"
"I believe in what is - that's science!"
"Ahh! SCIENCE!" the student's face splits into a grin. "Sir, you rightly state that science is the study of observed phenomena. Science too is a premise which is flawed..."
"SCIENCE IS FLAWED..?" the professor splutters.
The class is in uproar. The Christian remains standing until the commotion has subsided. "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, may I give you an example of what I mean?"
The professor wisely keeps silent.
The Christian looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's mind?" The class breaks out into laughter. The Christian points towards his elderly, crumbling tutor. "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's mind... felt the professor's mind, touched or smelt the professor's mind? No one appears to have done so." The Christian shakes his head sadly. "It appears no one here has had any sensory perception of the professor's mind whatsoever. Well, according to the rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science, I DECLARE that the professor has no mind."
The class is in chaos.
The Christian sits.

[SillyCourtney]

Did that really happen.. or was that just something off the internet? I'm not trying to be rude or anything.. I'd really like to know. If that actually did happen.. do you know at what school/university?

[*not_your_average*]

Wow. Both give extremely strong arguements. Ultimately, though, every view, I believe, has a flaw. Christianity has its flaws just as atheism does. But people continue to be Christians, don't they? And people continue to be atheists, don't they? Ultimately, it's all about free will and what we think is most logical.

[Aoiro]

It's in a way funny, but is very true.
Everything is flawed, and people should understand that.

[ExExEx]

What is light and what is dark? Is dark just the absence of light?

Try of think of it this way. What is evil? Is it just an absence of God?

[*mona lisa*]

Ahaha. Cute, but quite an interesting story.

Philosophy is so interesting.

[Retrogressive]

Why didn't you state that the arguing christian was in fact Albert Einstien, and that he was Jewish? I believe that is correct. I've heard the story before with Albert Einstien as the student.

[5ayuri]

Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's mind

That made me laugh.
Heh, that was a good story.

[Lithium718]

I like that story...makes sense

[OneOfTheseDayz]

That made me think a lot what a weird story I dont know If its real or not but If it is then It is probably correct but for that matter the student has no mind either meaning that we are all dumb

[AngryBaby]

i heard that story before, it got handed to me in a panflet at an airport, by a christian group. it was turned into a little comic book thing. by the very moment i got it i knew that the christian dude was gonna be set up to win his argument. thats why i wanna know if this is real or not. if its just a written story, or something that really happened.

maybe its just me but i kinda missed the point of the cold is absence of heat thing. i mean, if we instead called cold absence of heat big deal what would that change?=/. they both had okay arguments, i just wish the atheist dude spoke as long as the christian dude did. because ive heard people with better points here on cb about the morality issue than in that

is there anyone in here that has seen the professors mind?

lol that was goofy, guaranteed if he wanted some proof, he could bust the head open of the professor right then and there and find a brain. but you cant necessarily find proof of god.

[o0olaalaa]

i heard that story before i think its cool cuz if u really do think about it..its all true

[*stephinika*]

haha interesting story. certainly makes you think.

[EmmalieV]

Has someone posted this before , or Ive heard it before.Pretty interesting.

[aera]

Why didn't you state that the arguing christian was in fact Albert Einstien, and that he was Jewish? I believe that is correct. I've heard the story before with Albert Einstien as the student.

well, it was stated that the student was christian, so it can't be albert einstien, unless it was wrong?

my brother told me that before. it was interesting.

[Spirited Away]

This has indeed been posted before and has been debated.

here ya go: For Christians and Atheists

This post has been edited by Spirited Away: Oct 29 2005, 12:04 AM

[Retrogressive]

well, it was stated that the student was christian, so it can't be albert einstien, unless it was wrong?

my brother told me that before. it was interesting.

I think it WAS wrong. I mean, it matches Einstein's philosophies.

This has indeed been posted before and has been debated.

here ya go: For Christians and Aetheists

Oh yeah, this should be closed then.

[*incoherent*]

hmmm...nice philosophy. i understand some points, but im not christian.

[sadolakced acid]

the professor merely has to say one thing:

you cannot prove christainity with logic. then it is not christianty. christianity is about faith, and science is about logic. they do not't overlap. i will not force science in a house of faith. you shall not force god in a house of logic. accept it, or leave.

[Retrogressive]

the professor merely has to say one thing:

you cannot prove christainity with logic.  then it is not christianty.  christianity is about faith, and science is about logic.  they do not't overlap.  i will not force science in a house of faith.  you shall not force god in a house of logic.  accept it, or leave.

How can you leave science out of proving faith and vice-versa? Everything in the whole world, every detail in nature and science could be used as a proof or disproof of religion. Science is the measure of the power and brillance around us.

[ninjaskickass]

..

[gelionie]

Ahhh. I saw that before.
It's a pretty good article for those who don't believe in God.

[Endless_Love ...]

Wow. That was good. Well I think that some of the professor's arguments weren't entirely correct because:

"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."

The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways. One may interpret it as saying that according to the Bible you are evil, but I don't find any where in the Bible where they got that impression. The Bible is an interesting book, and it can be read in many different ways. I personally agree with the student/Christian.

[expoised]

i heard that story before, it got handed to me in a panflet at an airport, by a christian group. it was turned into a little comic book thing. by the very moment i got it i knew that the christian dude was gonna be set up to win his argument. thats why i wanna know if this is real or not. if its just a written story, or something that really happened.

maybe its just me but i kinda missed the point of the cold is absence of heat thing. i mean, if we instead called cold absence of heat big deal what would that change?=/. they both had okay arguments, i just wish the atheist dude spoke as long as the christian dude did. because ive heard people with better points here on cb about the morality issue than in that
lol that was goofy, guaranteed if he wanted some proof, he could bust the head open of the professor right then and there and find a brain. but you cant necessarily find proof of god.

a mind is not a brain... a mind is abstract. it's an idea. just like the way we say we have a heart or a soul. its not the same thing. you can't just crack open a body, find the heart and say "he has a soul".

and the example of cold being an absence of heat is using scientific terms. b/c scientifically... there is no such thing as "cold". that's why they used that example.

i'm pretty sure the story's made up...



//edit

sorry i didnt realize a topic's already been made.
this can be closed, i guess.

[Heewee]

lol that was goofy, guaranteed if he wanted some proof, he could bust the head open of the professor right then and there and find a brain. but you cant necessarily find proof of god.

That wasn't the point. He didn't say the professor's brain, he said mind. Sure, you'd be able to look at a brain and see all the nerves and how things work but you wouldn't be able to see, touch, taste, smell, or feel what he was actually thinking....in his mind.

[*xcaitlinx*]

wow ... i really like that. made me think. that second Christian student is very intelligent.

[Mulder]

when i started to read this i started to hate you... then i realised i hated the professor, then i reaslised that im christian that i shouldnt hate only forgive... but then i read the end and damn good job... but in sinful andi hate the professor because he makes statements without complete knowledge...

wow. some people are just really ignorant.

[Spirited Away]

That wasn't the point. He didn't say the professor's brain, he said mind. Sure, you'd be able to look at a brain and see all the nerves and how things work but you wouldn't be able to see, touch, taste, smell, or feel what he was actually thinking....in his mind.

But a mind can be proven with logic even without being seen. The ability to reason, to think, to have feelings, to be subjectively conscious can all be proven. This can be universally agreed with, I think, though we cannot say the same about faith.

[dearfriend]

when i started to read this i started to hate you... then i realised i hated the professor, then i reaslised that im christian that i shouldnt hate only forgive... but then i read the end and damn good job... but in sinful andi hate the professor because he makes statements without complete knowledge...

That was really... stupid.

[AngryBaby]

lol i agree^

[Heewee]

But a mind can be proven with logic even without being seen. The ability to reason, to think, to have feelings, to be subjectively conscious can all be proven. This can be universally agreed with, I think, though we cannot say the same about faith.

Actually, I could probably find many examples of people acting on complete faith. And anyways, isn't the absent of faith pessimism?

[Spirited Away]

Actually, I could probably find many examples of people acting on complete faith. And anyways, isn't the absent of faith pessimism?

What do you mean by "people acting on complete faith"? What I meant in my response is that a mind's existence can be proven with logic. I'm not sure what you mean by your response to mine.

Faith isn't the same as hope. When you lose hope, you may be a pessimist, but when you lose faith—religion wise, you may be a skeptic, but not pessimist unless you truly think the worst of everything. Those without faith do not generally think the worst of everything. That would be a truly faulty view.

[sadolakced acid]

Actually, I could probably find many examples of people acting on complete faith. And anyways, isn't the absent of faith pessimism?

it's called skepticism.

[Heewee]

What do you mean by "people acting on complete faith"? What I meant in my response is that a mind's existence can be proven with logic. I'm not sure what you mean by your response to mine.

Faith isn't the same as hope. When you lose hope, you may be a pessimist, but when you lose faith—religion wise, you may be a skeptic, but not pessimist unless you truly think the worst of everything. Those without faith do not generally think the worst of everything. That would be a truly faulty view.

I acknowledge that a mind's existence can be proven with logic. There are many different interpretations of faith. These are all the many definitions:
1 Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2 Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
3 Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4 often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5 The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6 A set of principles or beliefs

What I meant in my post about "finding many examples of people acting on complete faith" is that some people will go out on a limb and take a chance at something even though the odds are against them.....they have faith that things will work out. Thinking about this further, there might not be a clear line to prove the true existence of faith...we can make interpretations but we can't prove what people are thinking, therefore we can't prove that they have faith. However, that also means that it can't be disproven either.

[sadolakced acid]

you cannot prove faith with logic but you can prove logic with faith.

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

when i started to read this i started to hate you... then i realised i hated the professor, then i reaslised that im christian that i shouldnt hate only forgive... but then i read the end and damn good job... but in sinful andi hate the professor because he makes statements without complete knowledge...

Then you unfortunalty, are Biased.
You hate the professor because he is trying to take prove that the religion doesn't work out? Who cares? It's a debate. " Oh yeah, I hate him, I mean, I've never met him or anything But I just hate him cause he doesn't like my religion."

[Spirited Away]

I acknowledge that a mind's existence can be proven with logic. There are many different interpretations of faith. These are all the many definitions:
1 Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
2 Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
3 Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
4 often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
5 The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
6 A set of principles or beliefs

What I meant in my post about "finding many examples of people acting on complete faith" is that some people will go out on a limb and take a chance at something even though the odds are against them.....they have faith that things will work out. Thinking about this further, there might not be a clear line to prove the true existence of faith...we can make interpretations but we can't prove what people are thinking, therefore we can't prove that they have faith. However, that also means that it can't be disproven either.

While I agree with all those interpretations, I must remind you that we're discussing the religious significance of the word faith. So, once more, to lose faith of your religious belief means you've become a skeptic. Skepticism is not tantamount to pessimism the same way that hope is not the same as faith.

One can say people act on faith, others may say they act on impulse, instinct (eg nature), or even reasoning. Sure, one may choose to leave things to faith, but others may leave things to chance (ergo, the famous saying). However, even this rendition of faith does not fit into the context of our discussion, which has more to do with people having faith in their religion.

We need not to prove the existence of faith within the mind, the problem here is proving that faith's credibility with logic.


------
i'll leave this to the insomiac known to me as Mr. Acid. Must sleep.

[Heewee]

While I agree with all those interpretations, I must remind you that we're discussing the religious significance of the word faith. So, once more, to lose faith of your religious belief means you've become a skeptic. Skepticism is not tantamount to pessimism the same way that hope is not the same as faith.

One can say people act on faith, others may say they act on impulse, instinct (eg nature), or even reasoning. Sure, one may choose to leave things to faith, but others may leave things to chance (ergo, the famous saying). However, even this rendition of faith does not fit into the context of our discussion, which has more to do with people having faith in their religion.

We need not to prove the existence of faith within the mind, the problem here is proving that faith's credibility with logic.
------
i'll leave this to the insomiac known to me as Mr. Acid. Must sleep.

Okay, then referring faith to religion, people do show and practice their religions with feelings. They attend either their church, sinigouge (sp?), masque, temple, or other place of gathering. They celebrate religious holidays and do other certain things that are related to their religion. Some people do this because they truly have faith in their religion, and others do it because they are forced to do it by somebody else. I guess that it can be "universally agreed" that faith, as far as religion is concerned, exists but it can't be proven or disproven in any one specific person.

PS: I'm off to bed too

[*basick*]

man made god as an excuse they could use when they messed up. holler

[AngryBaby]

lol^ or some may say its like a comfort thing

Actually, I could probably find many examples of people acting on complete faith. And anyways, isn't the absent of faith pessimism?

faith is not the thing we are questioning, we are questioning the being the people have faith in

[*mipadi*]

the professor merely has to say one thing:

you cannot prove christainity with logic.  then it is not christianty.  christianity is about faith, and science is about logic.  they do not't overlap.  i will not force science in a house of faith.  you shall not force god in a house of logic.  accept it, or leave.

And what happens when you throw in the fact that the article errs a bit--philosophy is not a science?

[sadolakced acid]

then you say you can't prove faith with logic but you can prove logic with faith.

[Spirited Away]

Okay, then referring faith to religion, people do show and practice their religions with feelings. They attend either their church, sinigouge (sp?), masque, temple, or other place of gathering. They celebrate religious holidays and do other certain things that are related to their religion. Some people do this because they truly have faith in their religion, and others do it because they are forced to do it by somebody else. I guess that it can be "universally agreed" that faith, as far as religion is concerned, exists but it can't be proven or disproven in any one specific person.

PS: I'm off to bed too 

Faith in religion exists in whom? There are those who have no faith in religions, such as Atheists and many free-thinkers. How would you explain that? Again, there isn't a need to prove or disprove that faith exists in certain persons, the point of this is proving a faith's credibility. As in, whether or not a follower of a religion has logical reasons to have that faith, i.e. what logical reasons are there to have faith that God exists.

Actually, faith may be proven subjectively. Objectively and logically, though, that is still very much a controversy.

[expoised]

i think you guys have missed the point in proving that the professor has a mind...

"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."
The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"
"No, sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir. I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus... in fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"
[No answer]
"Answer me, please."
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"
"No, sir."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"...yes..."
"That takes FAITH!" The professor smiles sagely at the underling. "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"

he said to prove the existance of Jesus Christ and/or God. Of course you cannot prove "faith" using logic, just like if i told you i were dreaming, you cannot prove that i was lying using logic. it's abstract. being able to prove christianity with logic eliminates the entire point of faith. if you need proof to believe in God, then that's not faith, that's just believing what's there. faith is fully believing in God with your all. So why would the proffessor be talking about proving faith?

He's asking the student to prove the existence of God,... of Jesus. Jesus Christ's existence has been recorded in history, he's not someone that people have made up. He's has existed, there's evidence, people knew him. The concept of him being God and The Son of God is the one in question.

Believing that is what takes faith. The Bible can be seen as a "textbook"... if you will. It shows that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that's "proof" enough for me, whatever you want to call it. And if you say that it isn't enough factual ground in the Bible, why do you believe the textbooks you read? What is real? What is logic?

It's an argueable topic,... but you guys can end up arguing until you both die.

BTW... in saying that a mind can be proven through logic... I guess you can to an extent. What about all the studies of Artificial Intelligence and computers? In a few hundred years... a mind probably wont be able to be proven 100% by logic anymore. Anyways... all the student did was counter the questions that the professor threw at the first Christian student. He asked the same questions that the proffesor asked ... proving a mind using the five senses. proving a mind through logic has nothing to do with what he was talking about.

[miss barnes]

wow they both had good arguments. makes you think...

[Fade to Black]

i read this story somewhere b4

[Spirited Away]

i think you guys have missed the point in proving that the professor has a mind...
he said to prove the existance of Jesus Christ and/or God. Of course you cannot prove "faith" using logic, just like if i told you i were dreaming, you cannot prove that i was lying using logic. it's abstract. being able to prove christianity with logic eliminates the entire point of faith. if you need proof to believe in God, then that's not faith, that's just believing what's there. faith is fully believing in God with your all. So why would the proffessor be talking about proving faith?

So are you saying that proving God's existence is not the same as proving one's faith? If so I'd disagree, but I'd like to see how you will answer the question before begin my ramblings.

He's asking the student to prove the existence of God,... of Jesus. Jesus Christ's existence has been recorded in history, he's not someone that people have made up.  He's has existed, there's evidence, people knew him.  The concept of him being God and The Son of God is the one in question.
Believing that is what takes faith.  The Bible can be seen as a "textbook"... if you will.  It shows that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that's "proof" enough for me, whatever you want to call it.  And if you say that it isn't enough factual ground in the Bible, why do you believe the textbooks you read? What is real? What is logic?
It's an argueable topic,... but you guys can end up arguing until you both die.
BTW... in saying that a mind can be proven through logic... I guess you can to an extent.  What about all the studies of Artificial Intelligence and computers? In a few hundred years... a mind probably wont be able to be proven 100% by logic anymore. Anyways... all the student did was counter the questions that the professor threw at the first Christian student.  He asked the same questions that the proffesor asked ... proving a mind using the five senses. proving a mind through logic has nothing to do with what he was talking about.

1) Is the professor asking the student to prove Jesus' existence in history as a human? If so, then there is no point to make except that the professor needs a clue and that this whole story is a charade. However, it's clear that the professor meant to ask in terms of Jesus's existence as the Son of God and the student being to experience Jesus with the five senses. That is the meat of the story that, in my point of view, has been overlooked.

2) Some textbooks contain errors and are antiquated. As for what is 'real', my answer would be facts. Logic? It is reason.

3) Why would AI interrupt the fact that logic can prove a mind? AI may not be a human mind, but it is a mind if it can reason.

4) Obviously the story was written with an intent to prove the professor wrong from a Christian point of view. Proving a mind through logic is simply a way to balance this bias.

5) At any rate, I think it is possible to prove the mind with one of the five senses: to hear. What do you think? If we're actually having this conversation verbally, you would be hearing my mind.

[Paradox of Life]

4) Obviously the story was written with an intent to prove the professor wrong from a Christian point of view. Proving a mind through logic is simply a way to balance this bias

That's what I've been thinking. This story is extremely biased. They make the professor seem like he's the antagonist. He has a point. So does the Christian. Science and religion are two different things. There's no reason to debate on that basis.

[mocassinsx29]

that's why i'm agnostic. >_>

[expoised]

So are you saying that proving God's existence is not the same as proving one's faith? If so I'd disagree, but I'd like to see how you will answer the question before begin my ramblings.

yes... proving God's existence is not the same as proving one's faith.
Proving God's existence is trying to prove that God is something concrete.. something that's really there, whereas faith is the belief in God.

(dictionary.com)
faith n. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.
Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.

I'm not really sure how much you've studied Christian religion or if you have ever been to church. But, what we've been taught since sunday school, as little kids, was that faith was to have complete belief and trust in Jesus Christ, that he is the son of God. To us, faith is almost like following something blindly; but, our trust in him is concrete enough. So, you can't prove faith by trying to prove the existence of God. That just takes away and destroys the entire point of being faithful. by saying that my faith in God is based on tangible evidence of his existence means that i'm truly not faithful at all. We have to believe in him, despite an inability to see, touch, feel, smell, and hear him.

1) Is the professor asking the student to prove Jesus' existence in history as a human? If so, then there is no point to make except that the professor needs a clue and that this whole story is a charade. However, it's clear that the professor meant to ask in terms of Jesus's existence as the Son of God and the student being to experience Jesus with the five senses. That is the meat of the story that, in my point of view, has been overlooked.

ok then tell me this... can Buddhist experience Buddha with all five senses? what about Allah, or whoever else is a central point in any type of religion? I know Buddhists don't see Buddha as we Christians see Jesus, but still... why are we overlooking all of that? The point is that they cannot. They're all recorded prophets and whatnot in history, but again.. to have faith is to not rely on the five senses.

2) Some textbooks contain errors and are antiquated. As for what is 'real', my answer would be facts. Logic? It is reason.

Of course not all textbooks are correct... but nobody's thrown out the Bible yet.
And... if you live your whole life relying on facts and reason... things that are right out in front of you to think and see and feel... then there's a whole abstract aspect of life that you're missing. but, that's just my opinion...

3) Why would AI interrupt the fact that logic can prove a mind? AI may not be a human mind, but it is a mind if it can reason.

is reason the only thing a mind can do? can't you love? have opinions? a mind can think, judge, act, feel, have emotions... AI cannot. A mind is what makes us human. AI is just the human mind, attempting to duplicate itself on a computer... but it can't go much farther beyond the ability to reason, calculate things, etc.

4) Obviously the story was written with an intent to prove the professor wrong from a Christian point of view. Proving a mind through logic is simply a way to balance this bias.

maybe it was... or maybe it was just taking what the professor used to attack Christianity to try and prove that his attacks can work against him too. And i still don't think you can prove a mind through the five senses... which doesnt necessarily mean logic.

5) At any rate, I think it is possible to prove the mind with one of the five senses: to hear. What do you think? If we're actually having this conversation verbally, you would be hearing my mind.

No i wouldnt be hearing your mind. I would be hearing your voice expressing a thought in your mind. I dont believe that AIM/computer bots have minds... so i'm sayin that if i have a conversation with SmartBot or whatever that AIM bot's name is... i'm not having a conversation with his mind. i'm having a conversation with some computer programs made up of symbols, and some type of code.

[Heewee]

5) At any rate, I think it is possible to prove the mind with one of the five senses: to hear. What do you think? If we're actually having this conversation verbally, you would be hearing my mind.

As Melissa said, we wouldn't be hearing your mind. We would be hearing you talk but nobody can tell what your thinking. Nobody can read your mind (unless you believe in psychics but by the impression I have gotten from you, I doubt that you would). We can't see your thoughts, smell your thoughts, touch your thoughs, or taste your thoughts either. So does that say that you have no mind? Of course not. Just because we can't see it (or feel, taste, smell, or hear it) doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

[justdecent]

That would have reaked havok in my ethics class in college.... thats crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!