/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>693907

Cyborgs as in a lab tube hybrid of cybernetics and human, or just augmented human? Bad idea either way. Tech replacement and new iterations come faster with every year that passed and starts to fails within 5 years top. Cannot regenerate/heal on its own, need maintenance, vulnerable, resource draining, etc. And the flesh stood the test of time since Adam, can heal and improve on its own by heavy usage unlike steel.

In short, I cannot tell if it is sin or not because I cannot fathom His thoughts. But I can tell you that it is a very bad idea and only total fool would swap their God given flesh for steel. We are not made out of steel for a reason you know.

Also, stop watching too much anime/hollywood crap. Some are fine, they are just fictions for fun, but getting infatuated with their represented ideas and stuffs are exercises in wasting time. Also don't post anime pictures here if you want warmer receptions.

>>693907

>Cyborgs

If you mean argumneted humans, no if its about replacing lost limbs or wounded parts, but if its about transhumanism shit, then yes. Anyways brain will rot anyway and it would be expensive to maintain, not to mention that you can replace certain parts of the body, like limbs, but not the entire body, its outright impossible.

>human hybrids

well, last time it supposedly happen, it ended up with flood.

>>693909

>Also don't post anime pictures here if you want warmer receptions.

Only spergs get mad at this here.

>>693911

>Cyborgs

If you mean argumneted humans, no if its about replacing lost limbs or wounded parts, but if its about transhumanism shit, then yes. Anyways brain will rot anyway and it would be expensive to maintain, not to mention that you can replace certain parts of the body, like limbs, but not the entire body, its outright impossible.

The argument with cyborgs so far it’s to expensive and eventually you will break down and die which we all do in the end technically but not really a sin though

>human hybrids

well, last time it supposedly happen, it ended up with flood

Yer but these aren’t angels though

>>693910

>Okay so it’s not a Sin

No. I just said I don't know if it is a sin or not (for reference: to sin is to go against God, not the common misnomer of "sin=bad thing" but also all sins are inherently bad in nature), only it is bad idea to replace fully functioning flesh for steel.

>>693911

>Only spergs get mad at this here.

Just giving OP some head-ups. I would have cuss him out otherwise.

>>693913

But people could of been saying that about blood transfusions like back in the day

>>693912

>The argument with cyborgs so far it’s to expensive and eventually you will break down and die which we all do in the end technically but not really a sin though

No, Its also if you desire to replace all flesh with machine parts, which is not only stupid but also sin (transhumanism thing). Thing I was discussing was prosthetics, like artificial limbs or hearts.

>Yer but these aren’t angels though

You only get these though.

If you are implying about genetically engineering people (…like adding non-human DNA chunks), yes, its a sin.

>>693915

only retarded JW have problem with that

>>693917

And future Christian could say that about cybernetic limb replacement

>>693920

No I’m not, I’m genuinely interested in what other Christian think

>>693907

Mutilation i.e. unnecessary change of human body is and always will be grave sin against nature.

>>693959

>against nature

Yer, but what about God also please use verses to backup your claim

>>693907

Cyborgs are one thing, "hybrids" are another

If someone is injured and has to have cyborg implants to survive, that seems fine, but cutting out healthy body parts sounds terrible as does human-animal hybrids

>>693974

Ah, but that’s not the question it’s a sin

>>693975

Is it I meant

<not wanting an exosuit

<wanting to BE the exosuit

>>693971

>Yer, but what about God

Natural Law is part of Eternal Law, made by God. Sins agaisnt nature are sins against God by defintion.

>please use verses to backup your claim

As soon as you use verses to back up this condition there are not any*

>>693907

I had visions of a world like this before. An evil jew-like scientist made a monster virus to render humans dumb and incapable of uniting and fighting back against slavery. The resisting humans used tech to immunize themselves and created their own utopia away from him but it eventually fell into degeneracy and a “mark of the beast” type event turned most of them into a suffering hivemind. And the remaining real humans were enslaved by the visionworld equivalent of Lucifer.

>>693989

Oh look, yet another interpretation of the Mark of the Beast that's anything but what John said it was.

>>693997

Well I doubt whether the concept of a true AI that is indistinguishable from a genuine person is actually possible, I'm basically certain of these two points

1) No matter the complexity, a machine cannot be conscious. Consciousness is metaphysical, our consciousness (i.e. the actual sense of "being", having thought, experiencing) is not synonymous with our brain structure. The interplay between the two and to what extent they interact is basically still a total mystery, but that they are distinct, to me, is basically incontrovertible. Therefore even a maximally complex machine should not have consciousness unless imbued with such by some metaphysical actor.

2) From a Christian (True) perspective: Humans are made by God and in the image of God, machines are made by man who has no power to recreate the image of God. Therefore, no machine can be of equal worth to a Human being.

But I pray that such useless contraptions are never created, Lord knows what society could become. Liberals already have enough trouble admitting the divine nature of human life, it would not be long before demands that we treat these walking puppets with "equal rights" to actual people, and even worse, think of how much the anti-social neuroses consuming society would worsen when you could literally fabricate convincing artificial people to suit your whims/fetishes/etc.

>>693915

No credible christian body, or just general Christian population has thought that way about blood transfusion (Jehovah's aren't Christians in case you don't know), stop taking atheist pseudo-history of Christians being backward Luddites seriously, Christian civilizations have been the most technologically advanced on Earth for as long as there have been Christian civilizations. That doesn't mean that any perverted thing you'd like to do with technology is right.

>>693919

>Future people might be retarded, let's be retarded now

r/atheism or r/progressivism might be more your speed.

>>694044

>Liberals already have enough trouble admitting the divine nature of human life

To be honest, I am also more worried about this.

Modern day degenerates degraded Man from supreme creature and living icon of God to mere animal and just a lump of molecules. It will get only worse and wordse

>Daniel 2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

>>694250

People already have big egos and already think there Gods

>>694250

Transhumanism I can agree is bad

>>693918

>Evil

Don't say that or you will lose your precious "loyalty points" as per the anti bad-thoughts act!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJg02ivYzSs