Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8936 total)
24 online now:
PaulK, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (2 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,646 Year: 16,682/19,786 Month: 807/2,598 Week: 53/251 Day: 6/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Way to Think About Free Will and God: Open Theism
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 271 of 378 (846371)
01-05-2019 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by GDR
01-04-2019 9:55 PM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
GDR writes:

The resurrection is recorded as historical...It does require faith that the Gospel accounts are essentially accurate.

You can't it both ways, both historical and faith driven. The resurrection is a core religious belief of Christianity, not history.

The resurrection requires that the laws of science as we currently know them have to be suspended.

As you said, this is what you believe on faith. It isn't reality. The laws of science were never suspended. Nothing violating the laws of science has ever been shown to happen.

Science cannot be used to repudiate or confirm resurrection.

Well, yes, of course, in the same way that science can't be used to repudiate or confirm Harry Potter. There's no evidence to confirm or repudiate, plus it violates known laws of science, plus it's obviously religious which places it in the same grabbag of fantastical claims with other religions.

You can have a favorite religion. Yours happens to be Christianity, others Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judasim or any of a number of others. All their beliefs are based upon faith. None of these religions are historical or factual or scientific when it comes to things like resurrections.

However, I agree with Tangle that without the resurrection being historical Christianity is a false religion.

You just finished saying that the resurrection being historical has to be accepted on faith, which means you have no objective evidence that the resurrection is historical. Objectively Christianity is a false religion (so are all the others) - it can only be accepted on faith, which is as it should be. All those who march off to objectively prove their religion are on a fool's errand.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by GDR, posted 01-04-2019 9:55 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 1:59 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 283 by GDR, posted 01-05-2019 3:43 PM Percy has responded

    
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 272 of 378 (846376)
01-05-2019 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Percy
01-05-2019 12:17 PM


Resurrection: Historical Or Faith-Driven?
At church, with the evangelical Dispensationalists, we (I) was taught that the Bible was to be taken literally. Period. ( Like member Faith believes.) This resonated oddly with my limited scientific logic, reason, and reality that I learned here at EvC so I began to have some extreme episodes of cognitive dissonance. Unlike Faith, who has plugged her eyes and ears and waved all of that aside to preserve her belief, I reluctantly embraced it...though not so much that I stopped believing.

It is still going on, and you can see it reflected in my arguments. (A recent one was suggesting a metaphorical, rather than literal resurrection) Of course, we were taught that the Resurrection was the core anchor of our belief and that rejecting that was rejecting the very power and reality of God. So to clarify: At this point in time I have not rejected the Resurrection. I DO acknowledge that it is faith-driven and outside of the realms of naturalistic explanations.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 01-05-2019 12:17 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 273 of 378 (846377)
01-05-2019 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by Tangle
01-05-2019 8:18 AM


Re: Science Goes To Church
Tangle writes:

Obviously invoking god(s) everytime we don't understand something is just plain dumb.

Perhaps. All I know is that I often pray when a problem seems more than my intellectual and physical capacities can handle. Prayer seems to free my mind of the burden and weight upon my shoulders. Critics may say that using God this way is a "cop-out" and that (as jar used to say) we need to do it ourselves. I won't disagree...but it is my habit to *do it* in Communion with Gods innate wisdom through prayer. (at this point my critics are again rolling their eyes!)
Tangle writes:

I say all that the knowledge of *your* god is in *your* book.

And I would say that "No, He is in my heart (and imagination). " There. I said it. I used to be afraid that declaring God to be in my imagination proved that He was limited to such a domain. Lately, however, I have concluded that His wisdom and inner presence is a Holy Communion *within* my mind rather than a simple childish story and fantasy *of* my mind.
ringo writes:

Why did He "have" to do it first? Why did He "have" to do it at all?

Without Jesus, we would simply have an unknowable, undefinable, and made-up "God" within our mind. Irrelevant whether One actually existed or not. Because of Jesus, God became personal. Knowable. Approachable...at least to Western Christians. Islam still regards Allah as autocratic, definite, and distant. Allah is limited to the book. Jehovah would also be limited to the book without Jesus. Of course, critics will continue to insist that He does not exist, is at best historical, and has been mythicised by the later embellishing authors. Which is why we here continue to argue.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Tangle, posted 01-05-2019 8:18 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Tangle, posted 01-05-2019 3:18 PM Thugpreacha has responded
 Message 280 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 3:26 PM Thugpreacha has acknowledged this reply

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4504
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 274 of 378 (846385)
01-05-2019 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Thugpreacha
01-05-2019 6:00 AM


Re: Science Goes To Church
While the Catholic Church is persistently accused of destroying
classical or Greco-Roman culture, the fact is that the monasteries
should be credited for "the careful preservation of the works of the
classical world and of the Church Fathers, both of which are central
to Western civilization" ...

Well, I wouldn't put this in such illustrious terms.

True, the church did indeed help preserve some of the prior (or classical) culture, and did study some of what we know today as "the sciences,' but it was all in the service of the church and anything that smacked of challenge to doctrine was suppressed, often violently so.

I don't know of anyone who accuses the church of trying to destroy classical culture but I also don't know of anyone (reasonable) who believes the church sought to extend or enhance that knowledge except through the church's lens of superstition. Which is to be expected since it's a religion and is centered/dependant on superstition.

As a matter of fact, demonstrable fact, the church's suppression of the society and intellect around it led to a clear and devastating retrenchment of human knowledge and human intellectual advancement that still haunts us this 1000++ years later. We don't call it the dark ages for nothing.

Second,

On the interpretation of Scripture,
Andrew of St. Victor argued that the interpreter "should realize this: in
expounding Scripture, when the event described admits of no
naturalistic explanation, then and only then should we have recourse
to miracles"

... this is the very crux of religion's problems.

When the event described in scripture admits of no naturalistic explanation, then the scripture is wrong. There is never any justification to corrupt the intellect with appeals to majik.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 6:00 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 3:14 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 275 of 378 (846387)
01-05-2019 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by AZPaul3
01-05-2019 3:10 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
When the event described in scripture admits of no naturalistic explanation, then the scripture is wrong. There is never any justification to corrupt the intellect with appeals to majik.

the justification in our minds is because we are believers. We feel that we "met" God. I know it sounds ridiculous, but its why I do what I do. There would be no reason to defend anything was that belief not entrenched.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by AZPaul3, posted 01-05-2019 3:10 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by AZPaul3, posted 01-05-2019 3:18 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7067
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 276 of 378 (846389)
01-05-2019 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Thugpreacha
01-05-2019 2:18 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
Phat writes:

Perhaps. All I know is that I often pray when a problem seems more than my intellectual and physical capacities can handle. Prayer seems to free my mind of the burden and weight upon my shoulders. Critics may say that using God this way is a "cop-out" and that (as jar used to say) we need to do it ourselves. I won't disagree...but it is my habit to *do it* in Communion with Gods innate wisdom through prayer. (at this point my critics are again rolling their eyes!)

Whatever floats your boat...

And I would say that "No, He is in my heart (and imagination). " There. I said it. I used to be afraid that declaring God to be in my imagination proved that He was limited to such a domain. Lately, however, I have concluded that His wisdom and inner presence is a Holy Communion *within* my mind rather than a simple childish story and fantasy *of* my mind.

Have you worked out yet that you can conclude whatever you like whenever you feel like it?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 2:18 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 3:20 PM Tangle has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4504
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 277 of 378 (846390)
01-05-2019 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by Thugpreacha
01-05-2019 3:14 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
There would be no reason to defend anything was that belief not entrenched.

And you are so entitled. Wrong, but so entitled.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 3:14 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 3:21 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 278 of 378 (846391)
01-05-2019 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Tangle
01-05-2019 3:18 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
tangle writes:

Have you worked out yet that you can conclude whatever you like whenever you feel like it?

Of course! That's the essence of free will.

You may argue that i'm simply making stuff up...which is a hard one to challenge. Im working on it though!


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Tangle, posted 01-05-2019 3:18 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Tangle, posted 01-05-2019 4:25 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(3)
Message 279 of 378 (846392)
01-05-2019 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by AZPaul3
01-05-2019 3:18 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
I think I learn far more when people disagree with me.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by AZPaul3, posted 01-05-2019 3:18 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 280 of 378 (846394)
01-05-2019 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Thugpreacha
01-05-2019 2:18 PM


Re: Science Goes To Church
Phat writes:

Without Jesus, we would simply have an unknowable, undefinable, and made-up "God" within our mind. Irrelevant whether One actually existed or not.


All you've done is add another unknowable, undefianable and made- up "Jesus" within your mind. Irrelevant whether One actually existed or not.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 2:18 PM Thugpreacha has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4960
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 281 of 378 (846395)
01-05-2019 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by ringo
01-05-2019 11:21 AM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
GDR writes:

The resurrection is recorded as historical.

ringo writes:

Where? Outside the Bible?

Sure, only in the Bible, but the Bible isn't just the testimony of one individual. As the Gospels are compilations of material there are numerous people testifying to the resurrection. In addition there are the Epistles with further testimony to the a historical resurrection.

GDR writes:

he resurrection requires that the laws of science as we currently know them have to be suspended. Science cannot be used to repudiate or confirm resurrection.

ringo writes:

The same can be said for the Flood.

Actually that isn't correct. The resurrection is only supported by the accounts written about the event. The resurrection would not have left any lasting physical evidence. The flood can very easily, (don't tell Faith this), be repudiated by science because if it had occurred it would have left physical evidence.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 11:21 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 3:38 PM GDR has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 17281
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 282 of 378 (846397)
01-05-2019 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by GDR
01-05-2019 3:28 PM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
GDR writes:

Sure, only in the Bible, but the Bible isn't just the testimony of one individual. As the Gospels are compilations of material there are numerous people testifying to the resurrection. In addition there are the Epistles with further testimony to the a historical resurrection.


A bigger pile of unreliable evidence doesn't make it more reliable. And of course each source was compiled by individuals with their own agenda and the canon was compiled by people with an agenda. I'd say that that adds up to a lot less than "historical evidence".

GDR writes:

The resurrection would not have left any lasting physical evidence.


That isn't the only way that science repudiates the resurrection. As far as science is concerned, the resurrection is as impossible as the Flood, as impossible as Jesus flying up to heaven by flapping His arms.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by GDR, posted 01-05-2019 3:28 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 4:10 PM ringo has responded
 Message 285 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-05-2019 4:14 PM ringo has responded
 Message 289 by GDR, posted 01-05-2019 5:23 PM ringo has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4960
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 283 of 378 (846398)
01-05-2019 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Percy
01-05-2019 12:17 PM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
percy writes:

You can't it both ways, both historical and faith driven. The resurrection is a core religious belief of Christianity, not history.

Of course it can be had both ways. I believe by faith that the resurrection is an historical event.

percy writes:

As you said, this is what you believe on faith. It isn't reality. The laws of science were never suspended. Nothing violating the laws of science has ever been shown to happen.

The Gospels say that you are wrong.

Percy writes:

Well, yes, of course, in the same way that science can't be used to repudiate or confirm Harry Potter. There's no evidence to confirm or repudiate, plus it violates known laws of science, plus it's obviously religious which places it in the same grabbag of fantastical claims with other religions.

So what? One can be right and the others wrong, they can all be right or they can all be wrong. One thing they do agree on and that is that there is a deity.

Percy writes:

ou can have a favorite religion. Yours happens to be Christianity, others Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Judasim or any of a number of others. All their beliefs are based upon faith. None of these religions are historical or factual or scientific when it comes to things like resurrections.

If you are talking about miracles, I have never claimed that they are scientific but that has nothing to do as to whether or not they are factual or historic.

Percy writes:

You just finished saying that the resurrection being historical has to be accepted on faith, which means you have no objective evidence that the resurrection is historical. Objectively Christianity is a false religion (so are all the others) - it can only be accepted on faith, which is as it should be. All those who march off to objectively prove their religion are on a fool's errand.

I'm not trying to prove anything. I do have objective evidence in the physical writings in the Gospels, I do however by faith form a subjective view as to their veracity.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Percy, posted 01-05-2019 12:17 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Percy, posted 01-05-2019 5:29 PM GDR has responded
 Message 292 by NosyNed, posted 01-05-2019 5:32 PM GDR has responded

    
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 284 of 378 (846406)
01-05-2019 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by ringo
01-05-2019 3:38 PM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
And of course each source was compiled by individuals with their own agenda and the canon was compiled by people with an agenda. I'd say that that adds up to a lot less than "historical evidence".
I would argue that the mythicists also have an agenda. Having an agenda in and of itself is not a disqualifier. I have an agenda here at EvC, which is to sharpen and defend my arguments, reformulate and reconsider at times, and hopefully, listen to others at times.

Dr.Carrier has an agenda. Sam Harris has an agenda. Richard Dawkins has an agenda.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 3:38 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 4:14 PM Thugpreacha has acknowledged this reply

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12789
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 285 of 378 (846407)
01-05-2019 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by ringo
01-05-2019 3:38 PM


Re: Calling evil good or good evil.
ringo writes:

As far as science is concerned, the resurrection is as impossible as the Flood, as impossible as Jesus flying up to heaven by flapping His arms.

It takes different amounts of evidence to convince different people. Science has little evidence to work within this case, but the absence of evidence is not a precondition towards evidence of absence. GDR was convinced without ever having seen the crime scene. You, on the other hand, need to show up like Columbo...snooping around and asking questions.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.
In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.
~Stile


This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 3:38 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by ringo, posted 01-05-2019 4:21 PM Thugpreacha has acknowledged this reply
 Message 293 by AZPaul3, posted 01-05-2019 5:41 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019