^^^

viaro:

3. If anything, it seems that the definition is telling us that 'non-material' is defined by that which is not able to be touched or seen - and there are loads of things we know that qualify as being "not able to be touched or seen", and yet are NOT 'spiritual'.

4. Do you want examples?

(a) Can you "touch or see" gravity?

(b) Is gravity material or 'non-material'?

(c) Is gravity therefore tangible or intangible?

5. Please try and answer these questions - they may help you see why I have concerns that your terms are loosely applied and are spiralling into tautologies that are not helpful.

In noting these points, we see that considering something as merely 'intangible' does not necessarily mean you have grasped the 'spiritual', or been able to convey your context clearly. This is all the more important if we consider that you already made this statement:

Deep Sight:

I regard it as irrational, especially if one reflects on what it means to state - "immaterial" or "intangible" realm.

Please read my last post.

I believe we are clear; Gravity is non-matter.

I explained that non-matter exists in light of and in relation to the physical universe and the interaction of physical things within the universe.

So for heaven's sake items of non-matter ARE NOT what we refer to - as the thread title indicates we refer to the spiritual intangible.

We are looking at physical things as opposed to spiritual intangibles.

Non-matter are phenomena within the physical world caused by th interaction of physical things.

E.G; Your shadow is non matter but is caused by the interaction of light particles with the mass of your physical body. Etc.

So please stop confusing the issues.

At all events with all this hocus-pocus on definitions you are yet to address the core questions.

Stop moving around in tangential circles that do not address the question of this thread - namely -

Can physical things dwelll in spiritual realms?

Deep Sight:

I believe we are clear; Gravity is non-matter.

I read it, and it seemed that I had anticipated you.

If you therefore take time to see how I have tried to compare your initial definition for 'intangible', what would you say about gravity then?

Agreed: 'gravity is non-matter' - and on that note, would we still say that gravity then is an example that qualifies under your definition of 'intangible' as -

Non-Material - lacking material qualities, and so not able to be touched or seen

. . yes??

Or, consider again:

Deep Sight:

When energy acts on physical things there can be physical movement or reactions of varied kinds and this may result in phenomena which may be classed as non-matter.

So, is energy also 'matter'? If you say yes, on what ontology would you be positing that?

But more important than that, I would ask: is energy also a "physical matter"?

In all this, I'm trying to bring you to just one fact: your definition of 'intangible', if taken as given from where you lifted it, simply does not go the distance. There are things which cannot be 'touched or seen', but which do not qualify as 'spiritual'.

That has been the simple point in all this, and for which I had impressed upon you to be specific. Your matter/physical/non-material/intangible etc. are still not helpful, if we just take for granted that we should look at what cannot be 'touched or seen' for the meaning of 'intangible' - and that again was why I have been concerned about the tautologies that appear in your arguments that have not been helpful.

Deep Sight:
So for heaven's sake items of non-matter ARE NOT what we refer to - as the thread title indicates we refer to the spiritual intangible.

Good - my point precisely. And that was why I have been waiting to see what you meant by the so-called 'spiritual intangible'.

Deep Sight:

We are looking at physical things as opposed to spiritual intangibles.

You should have said so and cleared all the meaningless tautologies. DeepSight, pardon me if I'm the sort of person who cannot take things for granted - especially when discussing with you. I don't mean any harm; but you are not helping your own cause if you cannot be clear and consistent in what you're arguing.

Deep Sight:

Non-matter are phenomena within the physical world caused by th interaction of physical things.

How does that square with the definition of 'intangible' which you gave?

Deep Sight:

So please stop confusing the issues.

I have not confused issues. If anything at all, I have consistently asked you to be clear, specific, and articulate, no?

Deep Sight:
At all events with all this hocus-pocus on definitions you are yet to address the core questions.

I proceed as soon as you remove your hocus-pocus from the thread, thanks.

Deep Sight:

stop moving around in tangential circles that dpo not address the question of this thread - namely

You don't understand yourself, nor the terms you use. That is why you are never set on dealing straight with issues at any time.

Deep Sight:

Can physical things dwelll in spiritual realms?

Have I not addressed that ALREADY?

Did you not quote me in post #4 where I said: "It is very conceivable for the material to enter into the spiritual or 'intangible'?!?

When I quoted you in post #14 on the same issue -

[list]

Deep Sight:

“. . . Do you really suppose such a body with such functionalities can enter into a realm said to be intangible?”

[/list]

. . . my answer followed immediately: 'Indeed. I'm persuaded that the physical body can enter into the realm of the 'spiritual' [size=14pt](if that's what you meant by 'intangible')[/size].'

How come you of all persons tend to be playing games as if this is all so new? From post #14 of this thread, I hinted that you are confused in the way you are using these terms, which was why I said "(if that's what you meant by 'intangible')" - because I knew that when you lift definitions on that term 'intangible', you will see your problem.

Fine. Well we are all clear on the terms now.

So here does this leave us?

We are clear that we are talking about physical things entering spiritual realms.

You have said above again that you regard this as possible.

Might I ask exactly how it can happen in your view - by what process -

Please answer in light of -

1. The fact of physical things having a specific dimensional construct which is at variance with the intangibility of a spiritual realm.

2. The fact of the functionalities of a physical body and that which it requires to subsist; e.g physical bodies need to breathe in other to survive.

Is there oxygen in spiritual realms to facilitate such?

Deep Sight:

Might I ask exactly how it can happen in your view - by what process -

Please re-visit post #14 - I laid out my reference for whatever answers you may read from me on these matters.

Deep Sight:

Please answer in light of -

1. The fact of physical things having a specific dimensional construct which is at variance with the intangibility of a spiritual realm.

The 'spiritual realm' - what do you mean by that? I asked you certain questions about that in post #41, viz:

[list]

But if we are to take you on your idealism of ontological musings here, I would like to ask: what is the nature of the reality/realities that exist beyond space and time? And what would you ever mean by 'space' and 'time' in regards of spatial constructs? And in what dimensional continuum are you making your assertion that is nothing more than a conjuring of your own limited thinking?

[/list]

If you are positing therefore that "physical things having a specific dimensional construct which is at variance with the intangibility of a spiritual realm", what then is the nature of the 'intangibility of a spiritual realm' which makes it impossible for physical things to enter into such a realm?

It is not just stating that the spiritual realm is 'intangible' that helps your discourses - we have seen other things that are intangible as well but yet not spiritual. These other things are understood as regards their nature; but intangibility of their natures do not therefore mean that the 'physical' cannot 'enter' or experience them.

Deep Sight:

2. The fact of the functionalities of a physical body and that which it requires to subsist; e.g physical bodies need to breathe in other to survive.

Is there oxygen in spiritual realms to facilitate such?

The idea of functionailities is merely relative. If the question is a matter of a physical body being able to "enter" the intangible, I have addressed that already. And we cannot now begin to negotiate on this, because I noted the precise term you used in post #4:

[list]

Deep Sight:

Also I asked him this Question  -

“Again the very make of the physical body is designed to deal with a physical atmosphere – in all its functions. Do you really suppose such a body with such functionalities can enter into a realm said to be intangible?”

[/list]

And in post #14 where I quoted you as above, my answer was this:[list]

viaro: Indeed. I'm persuaded that the physical body can enter into the realm of the 'spiritual' (if that's what you meant by 'intangible').

[/list]

How they "subsist" is not something I can articulate here. Why? Because I do not know a definitive answer within physics, biology or chemistry that can explain such spiritual phenomena satisfactorily. So, instead of pretending to give answers that are beyond my grasp, I don't think it is beyond me to simply say I do not have all the answers.

That does not mean for one instance that I doubt what I have already affirmed. No, I do NOT doubt that a physical body can ENTER into the spiritual realm. Nor do I hold on to physicalism as definitive of all phenomena in all realities. Some might argue that all that we find in the physical world of time and space must by default be explained by physical laws on premises of physicalism. But what happens when anomalies occur, which are outside the laws of physics and inexplicable within the matrix of physicalism? There are a great many examples even within religion and spirituality - but I should not digress.

There - the physical indeed possibly can ENTER into the spiritual realm. It all depends on how you understand what is the 'spiritual realm' in its essence/real nature, before you begin to draw any inference within any meaningful ontology.

viaro:


How they "subsist" is not something I can articulate here. Why? Because I do not know a definitive answer within physics, biology or chemistry that can explain such spiritual phenomena satisfactorily.

Do you not mean to say that there is no conceivable explanation to such a bizzarre postulation as that physical bodies may dwell bodily in spiritual realms?

I can't believe that you guys kept this ridiculous debate up for this long! Physical beings existing in the spiritual realm. . . absolutely nonsensical.

jagunlabi:

I can't believe that you guys kept this ridiculous debate up for this long! Physical beings existing in the spiritual realm. . .   absolutely nonsensical.

[color=#990000][/color]NO MIND THEM, DEM JUST DEY YARN ROBUSH FOR HERE, DEM JUST THEY BLOW GRAMMER SINCE. ABEG LET DEM KNOW SAY E DON DO!

Settled in Heaven

"For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven" (Psalm 119:89)

There are yet quite a number of unsettled controversies among Bible scholars as to the original text of certain passages in both Old and New Testaments. In fact, a frequent objection raised to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy is that, since all the original "autographs" have been lost, we can never really be sure of any passage.

It is interesting to speculate on what happened to those manuscripts directly inspired by God and penned by Moses, John, Paul, and the others. It is strange that they all simply disappeared, with not a hint as to their history. If they had been preserved in a church or monastery somewhere, they would soon have become idolatrous objects of worship, so it is probably best they are gone.

But where did they go? The famous "ark of the covenant" similarly vanished at the time of the Babylonian invasion, and many fruitless searches have been conducted for it even in modern times. In this case, however, we do have a remarkable revelation. "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament" (Revelation 11:19). Evidently, the ark has been translated into heaven! We must realize that heaven is a real place in this eternal physical cosmos. Enoch and Elijah were translated there in their earthly bodies, and Christ is there in His physical resurrection body.

If, perhaps, angels somehow carried the original manuscripts of God’s Word to heaven after enough copies had been made to assure its faithful transmission on earth, placing them there in the ark, like the tablets of the law when it was still on the earth, this would surely give added meaning to our wonderful text verse: "For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven!" HMM

@olaadegbu when jesus ressurected he ressurected with a glorified body, i'm going to give you proof: in the book of john 20:26 it talked about jesus appearing unto his disciples even though the doors were shut. there is something about the glorified body you must know, the glorified body is more glorious and better than the spiritual body, it can perform the function of physical and spiritual body, it is far more glorious cos it is everlasting!

joe4christ:

@olaadegbu when jesus ressurected he ressurected with a glorified body, i'm going to give you proof: in the book of john 20:26 it talked about jesus appearing unto his disciples even though the doors were shut. there is something about the glorified body you must know, the glorified body is more glorious and better than the spiritual body, it can perform the function of physical and spiritual body, it is far more glorious cos it is everlasting!

Yes. Jesus' physical resurrected body = His glorified body that we are going to inherit at the rapture and resurrection of the believers in Christ.

@OLAADEOGU GOD IS NOT AN AUTHOR OF CONFUSSION, IN 1CORINTHIANS 15:50 THE BIBLE SAID <flesh &blood cannot (NOT SHALL NOT O) but cannot enter the kingdom of God> IN VERSE 51 IT SAYS NOT EVERYONE IS GONNA DIE BUT WE SHALL BE CHANGED FROM CURRUPTIBLE BODIES INTO AN INCORRUPTIBLE BODIES WITHEN THE TWINKLING OF AN EYE (INSTANTA) ELIJAH AND MOSES APPEAR TO JESUS ON THE MOUNTAIN OF TRANSFIGURATION, ELIJAH APPEARED WITH A GLORIOUS BODY & NOT EARTHLY BODY!

Okay, so let me get this clear. There are now three kinds of "bodies" according to christians;

1)Physical Bodies
2)Spiritualy Bodies
3)NEW! Glorified Bodies(or Jesus Bodies ):- which is claimed by one NL member that it is better than the spiritual bodies(whatever "better" might mean)

Religion definitely has some creativity lattitude in it. Make it up as we go along. Must be fun. . .

Flesh And Bones

"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have" (Luke 24:39).

One of the speculations of modern liberals who deny the resurrection is that the disciples saw some kind of apparition, or even were having hallucinations, when they "thought" they saw Jesus alive after His death.  But a supposed "hallucination" is never seen by an entire group of people at the same time, as Jesus was seen, again and again.

Jesus Himself answers those who say it was a "spiritual" resurrection.  His spirit never died, so His spirit could not be resurrected.  At first the disciples did, indeed, think they were seeing His "ghost," but then He showed them the scars of the spikes that had pierced His hands and feet, and he also ate part of a fish and a honeycomb before them (Luke 24:37,40,42).  They could no longer doubt the reality of His bodily resurrection.  It is sobering to realize that He will always bear those scars, even in His glorified body.  The Scripture says that, when He comes again, "they shall look upon me whom they have pierced" (Zechariah 12:10).  "Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him" (Revelation 1:7).

It is also significant that Christ did not use the more common phrase, "flesh and blood" when He spoke to the disciples, but "flesh and bones."  His blood had been shed on the cross as the price of our redemption (I Peter 1:18,19).

In our own future resurrected bodies which shall be like His (I John 3:2; Philippians 3:21), blood will no longer be needed.  Blood is essential now for "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Leviticus 17:11), but in that day "the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed" (I Corinthians 15:52), to be like Him forever. HMM

jagunlabi:

I can't believe that you guys kept this ridiculous debate up for this long! Physical beings existing in the spiritual realm. . . absolutely nonsensical.

Wwell I must apologise. The debate was kept up for the simple reason that I was losing my mind over the astonishing claims made by some adherents of the christian faith here.

But I guess the points have already been made and the thread should be left to die in peace.

Claims that God wears a physical body in heaven are just out of this world - no pun intended.

So its done with then.

Deep Sight:

Wwell I must apologise. The debate was kept up for the simple reason that I was losing my mind over the astonishing claims made by some adherents of the christian faith here.

But I guess the points have already been made and the thread should be left to die in peace.

Claims that God wears a physical body in heaven are just out of this world - no pun intended.

So its done with then.

Actually, i was tempted to keep the debate humming along with some new points that you debaters left out of the discourse. But i won't bother.

^^^ What are the points. Please do tell. Just curious.

I promise not to extend discussion based on what you add.

Deep Sight:

^^^ What are the points. Please do tell. Just curious.

I promise not to extend discussion based on what you add.

Okay. The main point that ties the other points together is the possible existence of parallel universes.Are parallel universes existing in different dimensional planes physical or ethereal(i prefer that word)? There is nothing to suggest that they can only be ethereal, which means that they can also be just as physical in nature as our own universe here, but only just existing on a different frequency on the dial as our own universe hence we cannot perceive them.

Someone mentioned angels being spiritual beings with physical bodies who can appear and disappear between the socaled spiritual heaven and this physical realm. So that would mean that they are interdimensional beings, but that does little to qualify them as etheric beings. That only tells us that they are physical beings with interdimensional shifting capabilities. Interdimensional travel can be done technologically too, even though we humans do not have this technology yet, seemingly.

So where is this socalled heaven in which the christian god yahweh and the angels supposedly reside? In a physical world existing in a different dimension? Since we cannot perceive parallel universes with out 5 senses, could they be qualified as etheric worlds? Personally, i do not think it to be so. What is physical is physical, irrespective of where it exists, in this universe or in any other universe.

The main question here is, "should parallel universes be considered as "spiritual realms" based on our very limited sensory perception, or should they be considered only as physical universes merely existing on a different dial, despite our inability to perceive them?" If we do qualify them as the latter, then one would immediately see how a physical body can exist in them, because they are also physical universes. But that is still not the spiritual realm.Perhaps this is where the christians arguing for the possilibtiy of physical bodies existing in a non-physical realms got themselves all mixed up.

I don't know whether you are familiar with the new discipline of physics called, HYPER-DIMENSIONAL PHYSICS. This discipline deals with this kind of stuff.

jagunlabi:

I don't know whether you are familiar with the new discipline of physics called, HYPER-DIMENSIONAL PHYSICS. This discipline deals with this kind of stuff.

^^^

Wikipedia: Hyperdimensional physics is not taught in any recognized institution of learning anywhere in the world, and 19.5° energy on planet Earth has never been demonstrated.
_____
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_C._Hoagland#Hyperdimensional_physics

_______________

jagunlabi:

I don't know whether you are familiar with the new discipline of physics called, HYPER-DIMENSIONAL PHYSICS. This discipline deals with this kind of stuff.

^^^

The Enterprise Mission: This is a physics based on geometric and mathematical foundations which involves other spatial dimensions -- ergo the term, "Hyperdimensional" physics. The field itself began over a hundred years ago, as part of a burgeoning scientific inquiry by 19th-Century mathematicians and physicists into theoretical "non-Euclidian geometries" (geometries involving spatial dimensions in addition to "length, breadth and height", and a set of specifically predicted physical interactions of energy and matter determined by those "non-Euclidian geometries."

http://enterprisemission.com/physics.html

^^^

Wolfram Mathworld: Non-Euclidean Geometry

In three dimensions, there are three classes of constant curvature geometries. All are based on the first four of Euclid's postulates, but each uses its own version of the parallel postulate. The "flat" geometry of everyday intuition is called Euclidean geometry (or parabolic geometry), and the non-Euclidean geometries are called hyperbolic geometry (or Lobachevsky-Bolyai-Gauss geometry) and elliptic geometry (or Riemannian geometry). Spherical geometry is a non-Euclidean two-dimensional geometry. It was not until 1868 that Beltrami proved that non-Euclidean geometries were as logically consistent as Euclidean geometry.

SEE ALSO: Absolute Geometry, Elliptic Geometry, Euclid's Postulates, Euclidean Geometry, Hyperbolic Geometry, Parallel Postulate, Spherical Geometry

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Non-EuclideanGeometry.html

_________

jagunlabi:

If we do qualify them as the latter, then one would immediately see how a physical body can exist in them, because they are also physical universes. But that is still not the spiritual realm.Perhaps this is where the christians arguing for the possilibtiy of physical bodies existing in a non-physical realms got themselves all mixed up.

No, you jagunlabi got yourself all mixed up, sorry. I know that as a Christian, I have not so qualified the one realm as the latter, nor did I ever anywhere misconstrue the physical for the spiritual realm. Your glee at the so-called "hyperdimensional physics" does not help either. Why? For the simple reason that the hyper-D is simply a tour between Euclidean and Non-Euclidean geometries - and as has been noted, Non-Euclidean geometries have been proven to be as logically consistent as Euclidean geometry. So, I can understand and bear with you on the assumption of your remark: "If we do qualify them as the latter" - unfortunately, I am not one of those to so qualify them as such.

The fact that I did not so qualify them should be obvious to any careful and objective reader in my remarking that: "I do not know a definitive answer within physics, biology or chemistry that can explain such spiritual phenomena satisfactorily." Does the OP know any physics that explains spiritual phenomena satisfactorily? The hyper-D physics does not even come close at all!

Further, I asked DeepSight a few most basic questions in post #41, and have had to repeat them yet again in my penultimate repost above. These questions are:

[list](1) But if we are to take you on your idealism of ontological musings here, I would like to ask: what is the nature of the reality/realities that exist beyond space and time?[/list]

[list](2) And what would you ever mean by 'space' and 'time' in regards of spatial constructs?[/list]

[list](3) And in what dimensional continuum are you making your assertion that is nothing more than a conjuring of your own limited thinking?[/list]

If one has to even think along the lines of Hyper-D Physics (which is not taught anywhere in the world and has never been demonstrated), one would have to consider the questions above to on such ontologies about realities and 'realms'. As we all know, Hyper-D physics deals with 'other spatial dimensions' based on non-Euclidian geometries - yet, nothing specially arresting there, because the non-Euclidean are as logically consistent as Euclidean geometry.

The whole thing boils down to just one point: too many things are taken for granted by the proposer of this thread, who himself never seeks to address basic issues around the real meaning of spatial constructs for his use of terms that he wishes to discuss (such as 'spiritual realm' and all other tautologies that prove absolutely nothing).

Be that as it may, perhaps you and/or your friends could perhaps look for a more cogent physics that deal with and explains the spiritual satisfactorily as to their real essence/nature. Only at that point could a real discussion ensue.

I'm out ... for a long while. Enjoy.

Chai, what a whirlwind this thread was. Admittedly it descended to the banal, to my eternal shame, but i men!. . . the astonishing claims of the religionists here! This is why we must miss Viaro. His contention that God Almighty dwells in the spriritual heaven in a physical human body is one for great comedy.

We miss ya, Viaro. Come back, or reincarnate, and sizzle us with some more astounding claims such as these, please na?

@DeepSight

Just 2 days ago Viaro said he misses you guys too. Most especially you and toba.

As for the thread, his last post asked you some questions. Are you man enough to answer them after these 7 months plus?

LOL I just read the thread again. viaro my main guy. LOL! Dude makes you feel like you are arguing against an encyclopaedia!

It all comes down to the way each person understands and interpretes that which we do not truly understand. But the claim tha the physical can dwell in the spiritual realm is, at the least, ludicrous. Viaro and people like him are very good at defending the ludicrous even if their arguements are farcical in nature.

Deep Sight:

Chai, what a whirlwind this thread was. Admittedly it descended to the banal, to my eternal shame, but i men!. . . the astonishing claims of the religionists here! This is why we must miss Viaro. His contention that God Almighty dwells in the spriritual heaven in a physical human body is one for great comedy.

We miss ya, Viaro. Come back, or reincarnate, and sizzle us with some more astounding claims such as these, please na?

Jenwitemi:

Viaro and people like him are very good at defending the ludicrous even if their arguements are farcical in nature.

How did u know this about viaro? [s]or are u jagunlanbi that reincarnated into jenwitemi as alleged by KunleOshod?[/s] lol just joking sha. the dude often have the nerve for this kind of arguments. He also love to discuss metaphysics

---

InesQor:

@DeepSight

Just 2 days ago Viaro said he misses you guys too. Most especially you and toba.

Miss him too. I hope he settles down in time as reported by odunnu on his new breed of life

InesQor:

LOL I just read the thread again. viaro my main guy. LOL! Dude makes you feel like you are arguing against an encyclopaedia!

I must admit the fact, that the guy is loaded

Crazy thread