XPost: alt.atheism, talk.atheism   
      
   On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 21:26:47 -0700, Jeanne Douglas    
   wrote:   
   .   
   >On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:07:11 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:16:40 -0400, James Redford    
   wrote:   
   >>. . .   
   >>>Thus, immortality is logically inseparable from the existence of the   
   >>>capital-G God, since mathematically, immortality requires the   
   >>>existence of either an infinite computational state or a finite state   
   >>>which diverges to an infinite computational state (i.e., diverging to   
   >>>literal Godhead in all its fullness), thus allowing for states to   
   >>>never repeat and hence an infinite number of experiences.   
   >>   
   >>    Something would have to preserve the sense of self of the individual, and   
   >>somehow retain the sense of identity. From my position it seems God would   
   have   
   >>to do that for himself and any other beings he chose to do it for.   
   >>   
   >>>Consequently, transhumanism--if the goal by that position is   
   >>>immortality--is inherently theistic, not only in a lowercase-G god   
   >>>sense, but also in the capital-G God sense.   
   >>>   
   >>>Interestingly, this also means that the existence of biological   
   >>>evolution, far from demonstrating that God is unnecessary, is in fact   
   >>>a logical proof of God's existence *unless* one posits the additional   
   >>>postulate that there is a limit to evolution. Yet there is no logical   
   >>>limit to evolution other than infinite complexity; and there exists no   
   >>>empirical evidence that evolution is finitely-bounded. Thus, to   
   >>>believe that evolution has a finite cut-off would be to hold a belief   
   >>>without evidence, and thus it would be an irrational belief.   
   >>   
   >>    The fact that there are no beings in apparent transition from reptiles to   
   >>birds today, and very few fossil examples, is evidence that God influenced   
   >>evolution. The same is true for the lack of transition species of all other   
   >>types.   
   >   
   >How do you know that?   
      
       It is in itself. How would you like to pretend it's not? Try to be specific   
   for the first time.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)