Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Underlying Philosophy
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(2)
Message 79 of 577 (553446)
04-03-2010 4:32 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by sac51495
04-03-2010 3:38 AM


And what does that Savior do for us?
Just a quick FYI - many of us here have been born-again evangelical Christians; some, like myself, for over half of our lives. This is not a board for your attempts at evangelism, it is a discussion board. If you wish to discuss, fine. If you wish to evangelise, may I suggest going elsewhere?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by sac51495, posted 04-03-2010 3:38 AM sac51495 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by sac51495, posted 04-11-2010 10:51 AM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(2)
Message 80 of 577 (553448)
04-03-2010 4:38 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by sac51495
04-03-2010 2:58 AM


Re: It reverts back to the evidence
And during this observation, do you invoke the use of the laws of logic to decide just what you are looking at, or do you mindlessly stare at it, with no thoughts or assumptions?
Let's make this very simple for you:
A couple of hundred thousand years ago, Ug discovered that dropping a rock on an ostrich shell nicely broke it so that he could eat what was inside. A larger rock dropped onto small mammals would stop them running away, and they could be eaten. Later still, larger rocks smashed into the skulls of large mammals meant that not only could Ug eat today, but also tomorrow and the day after that.
A little bit later, this learned behaviour enabled UG's descendents to walk on the Moon.
Please explain where in the above scenario, any such thing as a god was required?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by sac51495, posted 04-03-2010 2:58 AM sac51495 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by CosmicChimp, posted 04-03-2010 9:06 PM cavediver has not replied
 Message 285 by tesla, posted 05-31-2010 10:20 AM cavediver has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(1)
Message 281 of 577 (562554)
05-30-2010 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by sac51495
05-30-2010 1:15 PM


Re: I
"why was He so merciful as to give us a reason to glory in Him?".
Your god creates a world where minor disobedience to him results in one's entire descendents suffering under a curse - a curse so terrible that it commits you to an eternity of unimaginable pain, unless you are lucky enough to hear of his "salvation" from his own curse he layed up on you. And this means we should give him "glory"? I'm sorry, this god of yours sounds like a complete tosser. Are you sure he's real? There are artists in the world far more deserving of glory than this bizarre concept. Here's one (sorry, embedding disabled)
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by sac51495, posted 05-30-2010 1:15 PM sac51495 has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 287 of 577 (562601)
05-31-2010 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 285 by tesla
05-31-2010 10:20 AM


Re: It reverts back to the evidence
evolution does not kill God.
Of course not. As all my theistic evolutionist scientist friends will tell you. But I was not arguing for no god. My story was simply illustrating that "deep" philosophical pondering inspired by some divinely-imbued "natural law" was not required for the scientific method.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by tesla, posted 05-31-2010 10:20 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by tesla, posted 05-31-2010 1:15 PM cavediver has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 290 of 577 (562620)
05-31-2010 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by tesla
05-31-2010 1:15 PM


Re: It reverts back to the evidence
Asking the right question is important in science because otherwise you'll waste alot of time hitting the same rock over and over and over and over.....
Very true, as evidenced again and again through-out history. One could even suggest that Christianity robbed us of, say, 1500 years of potential progress...
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by tesla, posted 05-31-2010 1:15 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by tesla, posted 05-31-2010 4:05 PM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 337 of 577 (563406)
06-04-2010 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 330 by sac51495
06-04-2010 11:14 AM


I would then ask "why does it make society unstable?", to which he would reply with another answer that doesn't really account for good and bad, or stability and instability.
No, I think he could give a good and valid conclusion to this line of reasoning, and a fairly obvious one to anyone who has thought about these matters.
You see, he has caught himself in an infinite regress
No, he has not. You are simply hoping that he will, as that will help make your point. Can you tell the difference?
"He would reply with..."
"He has caught himself..."
See what you did there? Yes?
This is why one must presume God or no god as a metaphysical belief.
I'm sorry, PaulK was talking about *minimal* assumptions. Could you perhaps give a definition of this thing you name "God"? It sounds rather un-minimal to me. You mention attributes of this "God", called omnipotence and omniscience. Could you please also provide definitions of these concepts, and perhaps show how they too are "minimal".
Some people will say though, that they take a "neutral" stance by weighing the evidence for both sides.
Both sides? You have introduced this bizarre concept, that sounds awfully complex, called "God", and now you are saying there are two sides defined by belief or non-belief in this "God". Can I come up with "Flibble" and define my own two sides by similar reasoning?
However, the point I have been trying to make is that everyone, whether they admit it or not, is suppressing the fact that they believe in God, because no worldview can account for everything we do and the way that we act other than the Christian worldview.
Wow, not a lot I can really say to this... yep, pretty much speechless at that.
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by sac51495, posted 06-04-2010 11:14 AM sac51495 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024