XPost: alt.atheism, alt.agnosticism   
   From: smiler@jo.king   
      
   On Wed, 13 May 2015 19:06:31 +0200, Malte Runz wrote:   
      
   > "Smiler"  skrev i meddelelsen news:mitu3k$nuv$1@speranza.aioe.org...   
   >>   
   >> On Mon, 11 May 2015 22:24:39 +0000, Smiler wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > On Sat, 09 May 2015 22:07:13 +0000, Smiler wrote:   
   >> >   
   >> >> On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:02:03 -0400, mur wrote:   
   >> >>   
   >> >>> On Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:46:59 -0500, Mitchell Holman   
   >> >>>    
   >> >>> wrote:   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>>>mur wrote in news:cfs2kat7bmirb4et3itpn7grae2ejj3p2t@4ax.com:   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>>> 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.   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>>  So you don't believe in evolution   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>>     Prevent your supposed evidence of that.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> Was that meant to be English?   
   >> >>   
   >> >>>>but you also believe your god is influencing it.   
   >> >>>>   
   >> >>>>  Most odd.   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>>     You can't comprehend the basic possibility that God infuenced   
   >> >>>     evolution.   
   >> >>> Other people can.   
   >> >>   
   >> >> What god would that be? The one you admit that you have no evidence   
   >> >> for?   
   >> >   
   >> >    
   >>   
   >>    
   >>   
   >    
      
   It appears that he has either run away or has fallen into a crevasse   
   caused by continental drift.   
      
   --   
   Smiler, The godless one.   
   aa #2279   
   Gods are all tailored to order. They are made   
   to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)