100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
Biblical faith is not meant to be a vacuous leap as it were. But that is exactly what it has become, with the scientific advances that have been made, that prove point after biblical point wrong. Hardly, I would argue that science in no way contradicts the bible. As far as evidence goes, I will give you one example. The ressurection of Jesus Christ. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
|
|
You are using Aristotalian logic, which implies yes/no. Schrodigger Cat analogy and Quantum physics implies the need for a maybe. One way to work around this is to use E-Prime, which is English with any use of the word "is" is removed. For example, on the previous light issue, if worded "light appears as a wave when measured by machine X and light appears as a particle when measured by machine Y" there is no contradiction. This is the language of most scientific writing. You use the yes/no logic to deny it. There is no way around it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
|
|
That was not the logical outworking of the gospels. As I said before, Jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world that men should fight over it. But again, the Crusades were done BY the Church(which also has yet to excommunicate Hitler) But to break away from just using Christianity examples, Look at the Middle East today. In Afghanistan, and Iraq, there is a price on EVERY US Soldiers head, not just because they are American, but because they don't believe the same thing as the Taliban and the Insurgents. I'm sure we have all seen the picture of the Middle Eastern man holding a sign that reads(paraphrasing): Islam is peaceful, if you don't think so, I'll kill you" So, you can say that is is "not a logical outworking" of the holy books all you want, but History has, and continues to show that it is just another reason to slay fellow man. You judge a philosophy by its teachings and the life of the founder. A good worldview will have three things 1Logical consistency 2Empirical adequacy 3Experiential relevance 1.) Logic is fluid and follows in the path of the premise. What may seem logical to me may not be logical to you. So number one is not specific. 2.) What amounts to empirical adequacy is also a personal consideration and opinion. 3.) Experiential relevance, too broad a requirement. Hence, the above three assessments can only be valid in judging your own world view, and not the world view of others whose opinions, beliefs and experience, premises and logic is different. Do you believe in truth? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 12:17 PM
|
|
I dont believe in a man in the sky who has a list of 10 things you cannot do. So, what you are saying, his you don't believe in the Christian God, or the Ten Commandments? I believe in the God of the bible, not some man in the sky. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
|
|
Truth is not non-contradictory, for example: light is a wave. light is a particle. Both statements are true and yet appear to contradict each other. Law of Non-Contradiction: (a) Not (p and not p) or (b) (for all x) not (x is P and x is not P). It is not possible that something be both true and not true at the same time and in the same context. I think the notion of time is more inherent in the Law as we normally understand it , but that the notion of context is equally important. Example: A table can not be both made entirely of wood and not made entirely of wood. Possible Counter Example : Light (l) is both a particle (P) and a wave (W). It makes sense to then say that (for all l) not (l is P and l is not P) and this statement is true because light is both a particle and not a particle. Problem: Both notions of context and time were lost. For physicists light is only considered to be a wave or a particle depending on the nature (i.e. context) of the problem to be solved. Light is not considered to be both a particle and a wave at the same time. More Counter Examples ? P = mostly empty space and x = a table. Or perhaps, P = is free and x = Paul. In both these case it seems we still need to be both temporally and contextually sensitive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
|
|
A good worldview will have three things 1Logical consistency 2Empirical adequacy 3Experiential relevance Well, there goes Religion. . . How does Christianity violate the laws of logic? How does it Not? You believe a guy was dead for three days, and rose from the dead. you believe that there is a man in the sky, who has a list of 10 things you cannot do if you do any of these things, you will burn and suffer for all eternity. But he loves you! Yes I believe there is a guy who was dead for three days and rose again. Its only illogical on a purely naturalistic basis. I dont believe in a man in the sky who has a list of 10 things you cannot do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 12:11 PM
|
|
That was not the logical outworking of the gospels. As I said before, Jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world that men should fight over it. But again, the Crusades were done BY the Church(which also has yet to excommunicate Hitler) But to break away from just using Christianity examples, Look at the Middle East today. In Afghanistan, and Iraq, there is a price on EVERY US Soldiers head, not just because they are American, but because they don't believe the same thing as the Taliban and the Insurgents. I'm sure we have all seen the picture of the Middle Eastern man holding a sign that reads(paraphrasing): Islam is peaceful, if you don't think so, I'll kill you" So, you can say that is is "not a logical outworking" of the holy books all you want, but History has, and continues to show that it is just another reason to slay fellow man. You judge a philosophy by its teachings and the life of the founder. A good worldview will have three things 1Logical consistency 2Empirical adequacy 3Experiential relevance 1.) Logic is fluid and follows in the path of the premise. What may seem logical to me may not be logical to you. So number one is not specific. 2.) What amounts to empirical adequacy is also a personal consideration and opinion. 3.) Experiential relevance, too broad a requirement. Hence, the above three assessments can only be valid in judging your own world view, and not the world view of others whose opinions, beliefs and experience, premises and logic is different. Do you believe truth is non contradiction? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 12:21 PM
|
|
I will not quote the cut and paste here but historical validity of the bible is questionable at best. Just like old folk stories, which the bible actually is, there is always a remnant of some place or event that may have actually happened in the story line but it does not make the folk tale historically valid at any point. Faith is just that believing blindly in something someone told you is truth without any proof of any kind. Science is the process of verifying facts to correspond with other facts and then draw a conclusion. No similarity there at all other than they both will be written by man How is the historical validity of the bible questionable? What folklore are you referring to? Biblical faith is not meant to be a vacuous leap as it were. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
|
|
That was not the logical outworking of the gospels. As I said before, Jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world that men should fight over it. But again, the Crusades were done BY the Church(which also has yet to excommunicate Hitler) But to break away from just using Christianity examples, Look at the Middle East today. In Afghanistan, and Iraq, there is a price on EVERY US Soldiers head, not just because they are American, but because they don't believe the same thing as the Taliban and the Insurgents. I'm sure we have all seen the picture of the Middle Eastern man holding a sign that reads(paraphrasing): Islam is peaceful, if you don't think so, I'll kill you" So, you can say that is is "not a logical outworking" of the holy books all you want, but History has, and continues to show that it is just another reason to slay fellow man. You judge a philosophy by its teachings and the life of the founder. A good worldview will have three things 1Logical consistency 2Empirical adequacy 3Experiential relevance Well, there goes Religion. . . How does Christianity violate the laws of logic? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tell me what you think
|
|
That made absolutly no sense. you have not aquired much sense??? that make more sense?? now there are two sense, as two both totally knowing that you could care less what it said be the only reason you do not wish to read??? if my 11 year old can read it, this be the only good knowing for me??? I like you davidben. "Nubby" ..I bet he reminds you of the visiting philosopher from Oxford you were talking about Funny, Ravi Zacharias is compared to the Oxford and Cambridge don C.S. Lewis. so are you saying they all speak in the same fashion as "DavidBen" No, but they are both unique. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denying the evidence of evolution does not make it less valid. The DNA of all living things is revealing more and more as time goes on. We will discover more than we currently know scientifically, that is the joy of science but I doubt at any point will the bible become historically valid. Too many have tried to prove it and have failed over and over again. Faith does not even compete with science at any level so the comparison is really a mute point anyway. THey are two different things. The bible is concerned with mans salvation. THe Bible is not a science book. It is not meant to be read that way. It is the science of God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denying the evidence of evolution does not make it less valid. The DNA of all living things is revealing more and more as time goes on. We will discover more than we currently know scientifically, that is the joy of science but I doubt at any point will the bible become historically valid. Too many have tried to prove it and have failed over and over again. Faith does not even compete with science at any level so the comparison is really a mute point anyway. THey are two different things. The bible is concerned with mans salvation. THe Bible is not a science book. It is not meant to be read that way. It is the science of God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tell me what you think
|
|
That made absolutly no sense. you have not aquired much sense??? that make more sense?? now there are two sense, as two both totally knowing that you could care less what it said be the only reason you do not wish to read??? if my 11 year old can read it, this be the only good knowing for me??? I like you davidben. "Nubby" ..I bet he reminds you of the visiting philosopher from Oxford you were talking about Funny, Ravi Zacharias is compared to the Oxford and Cambridge don C.S. Lewis. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not going to try to tell you your religion is incompatible that is for you to decide, but I will say evolution is a fact, so if it is not compatible then indeed Krimsa is right and your religion is not compatible with reality. Micro evolution is a fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 11:24 AM
|
|
Its not incompatible, the Catholic Church holds this view.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 11:06 AM
|
|
I dont believe God used evolution to create the first two human beings, but I say it is possible. Some Christians hold this view. Augustine said it years ago that the six days of Genesis are open to a wide range of interpretation. People like John Polkinghorn, former president of Queens college, Cambridge, and good freind of Stephen Hawking, I know John Polkinghorn loves the Lord. So you have good people on both sides of the wall. I believe theology makes most sense in the creation account of the first two human beings without macro evolution of the the first two human beings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Tell me what you think
|
|
That made absolutly no sense. you have not aquired much sense??? that make more sense?? now there are two sense, as two both totally knowing that you could care less what it said be the only reason you do not wish to read??? if my 11 year old can read it, this be the only good knowing for me??? I like you davidben. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Atheism Weak or Strong
Edited by
Nubby
on
Fri 01/30/09 10:42 AM
|
|
That was not the logical outworking of the gospels. As I said before, Jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world that men should fight over it. But again, the Crusades were done BY the Church(which also has yet to excommunicate Hitler) But to break away from just using Christianity examples, Look at the Middle East today. In Afghanistan, and Iraq, there is a price on EVERY US Soldiers head, not just because they are American, but because they don't believe the same thing as the Taliban and the Insurgents. I'm sure we have all seen the picture of the Middle Eastern man holding a sign that reads(paraphrasing): Islam is peaceful, if you don't think so, I'll kill you" So, you can say that is is "not a logical outworking" of the holy books all you want, but History has, and continues to show that it is just another reason to slay fellow man. You judge a philosophy by its teachings and the life of the founder. A good worldview will have three things 1Logical consistency 2Empirical adequacy 3Experiential relevance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The pagan community?
|
|
Is it
1Logically consistent 2Empirically adequate 3Experiential relevant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The pagan community?
|
|
I consider my views to be closest to those of the pagan religions, more specifically druidism. I feel very connected to the natural world in a very spiritual way. However, I'm not really sure how to get into the pagan community. I feel this is a journey that I can not approach on my own. Is there anyone out there who can possible offer some advice? I've done a bit of reading on my own but I want to experience it. Belong to it. What brings you to faith in pagan religions. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
