Evidence for God from Science

To be more accurate, i am specifically targeting disabled people. For example......someone lives a life with a decreased mental abilitly, and is never able to even comprehend God as everyone sees him, or morals, or right and wrong, or any of the virtues discussed in the bible. This person does not seem to have 100% free will, in fact the person in question hasnt even been given a chance to live a righteous life, choose god, or not choose god. I could probably elaborate further, but my general point has come across for the most part. (it can apply to a number of early mental diseases).

So one of the solutions i was thinking of is these types of unfortunate people who never truly have a chance at salvation might not be people at all. What do i mean? Well, lets say they are actually angels or some kind of servant of god, reincarnated in the flesh (maybe like jesus). Or maybe just some other being, idk for sure. The purpose of them is to test the resolve of Gods followers and see if they will be morally right even when faced with the frustrations some mentally disabled persons produce. There is obviously no way to verify my theory, because if this was put into the bible the purpose is invalidated. All i know is i feel more sympathy for disabled people then any other because it seems like they have free will, but it is being hampered.

So , any thoughts on this? Just a thought i had and i enjoy reading your responses

Let's boil your point down to a more simple way to frame it:

"What is a human being?"

Ah, well there's the hard part. It obviously isn't a "person" (whatever that is) with two arms, two legs, two eyes, etc., because otherwise amputees wouldn't be people. It isn't a "person" with consciousness, because otherwise we would cease to be people when we slept, and those in comas would likewise have lost their "humanness." You suggested that humans are defined by their free will, which begs the question, "Free will to do what?" We can't say the freedom to do anything we choose, because then animals have some form of the same type of free will. We can't even say the freedom to choose to sin or not, because that assumes that a sin nature is a basic and essential part of the human, which would disqualify Jesus. I don't think that free will, then, is the essence of "humanness."

For me, a human being is a being created in God's image. It is in that context that free will, sin, and salvation should be discussed. In that view, are stillborns, retarded people, etc. in the image of God? The answer must be yes. Of course, this doesn't resolve, on this level, the difficulty with them and salvation. I'm just saying that I don't think we can solve the problem by claiming that they aren't people in the first place.

And here's a simple way to validate your theory. How would you feel if someone proposed that we should euthanize everyone who lacks mental capacity. The reasoning would be that since they are not people, they are much more like the pests (roaches and such) that invade our homes, but for whatever reason, we have emotional attachments to these pests. We further reason that if it is good economics to kill the roaches in our houses, it should likewise follow that these "people" should be taken out of society so that they are no longer a burden on our system.

I'm sure you would cry in horror the first time the first one was put to death. That would be just wrong! Why? Because they're people. They're human beings, beings made in God's image.

Just my $.02.

Well i can sort of see what your saying, but with your example YES i would be horrified if someone did that, but that could be more because its possible that they are actually very disadvantaged humans, not because i am certain they are humans in the first place.

But is it not true that to assert that someone is a disadvantaged human presupposes humanness? Suppose I am a severely disadvantaged human. Does that not mean, by the very definition of the words, that I am a human being of the severely disadvantaged sort?

Humaness is not a measure of our ability to make choices.

Humaness is not a measure at all. It is simply this. Humans are created in the image of God. We're not equal in freedom, ability, talents and gifts and many other measures. We are all however, including the unborn, those too young to make decisions for themselves, those handicapped and never fully able to make such decisions or those who were and now are too old and incapacitated to make them or any other category we choose to create, made in the image of God and it is that, independent of any of our specific circumstances that makes us human.

We're either human or we're not. It's not a question of degree.

Well i would consider a being with human DNA a human, but also has a human soul. I call them disadvantaged humans because that is exactly how they are percieved. They could be human in the DNA sense, but what im saying is maybe in the soul sense they arent. My main problem is how to justify letting beings be created that have no way to seek salvation in this world, so i made this theory. Maybe the freewill/salvation is my real problem here.

ConfusedoneL wrote:Well i would consider a being with human DNA a human, but also has a human soul. I call them disadvantaged humans because that is exactly how they are percieved. They could be human in the DNA sense, but what im saying is maybe in the soul sense they arent. My main problem is how to justify letting beings be created that have no way to seek salvation in this world, so i made this theory. Maybe the freewill/salvation is my real problem here.

It's a good question.

Perhaps salvation has elements of God's soverignty involved as well and is not solely based upon a conscience response in the case of those unable to make it.

It's an age old debate and one which I lack the ability to fully resolve to my, let alone anyone else's, satisfaction.

The argument being raised here is the actual definition of "consciousness". Are brain-dead people unconscious? Well they are considered so by definition but does that mean that they don't think? Perhpas they think with a spiritual part of themselves. Do you need your physical entity to think? or is consciousness independent of your physcial state? This also raises questions about the nature of the universe and it brings into question ideas of dualism and monism ie does the physical exist or is the entire universe spirtual (or physical). If the universe is monistic and entirely spiritual (ie everything is God) then it can be argued that consciousness is not a product of the physical brain and these "disadvantaged" humans may have more spiritual links than we do.

If you believe in an age of accountability, then this might apply to.

I would like to, but frankly, I don't see any biblical evidence for one.

What makes somebody human?

I believe that to be truly human, somebody has to have a body and a spirit. Humans are the only beings on the earth that have physical and spiritual bodies. If somebody who is severely disabled has human parents (which presumably they do) it probably means that they are human.

The rock opera 'Tommy' by The Who sort of helps to explain this. In it, the title character spends almost all of the first half of the story being deaf, dumb and blind because of a childhood trauma (his father killing his mother's boyfriend and the parents telling him not to see, hear or tell anyone about it). In the song 'Amazing Journey' and the multiple 'See Me, Feel Me' riffs, it is made clear that even though Tommy has basically no communication with the outside world, his spirit is free and fully aware.

Even though somebody may not appear as able as us, it may be that they are enjoying a completely separate world to our own. You never know, some disabled people may be in God's presence spiritually, even if they aren't apparently able or aware.