Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9026 total)
95 online now:
PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), vimesey (4 members, 91 visitors)
Newest Member: JustTheFacts
Post Volume: Total: 883,394 Year: 1,040/14,102 Month: 32/411 Week: 53/168 Day: 1/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Case For A Creator
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 1 of 67 (856168)
06-28-2019 7:03 AM


Here at EvC, we tend to be skeptical of the integrity of Christian Apologists. While my critics say that I need to look at the evidence and quit accepting emotions and internal impressions as my evidence of God, they counter by saying that there essentially is no evidence for God...(at least the Christian Trinitarian One)

I bought Lee Strobel's book in order to see how the apologist defends the premise.

quote:
During his academic years, Lee Strobel became convinced that God was outmoded, a belief that colored his ensuing career as an award-winning journalist at the Chicago Tribune. Science had made the idea of a Creator irrelevant—or so Strobel thought. But today science is pointing in a different direction. In recent years, a diverse and impressive body of research has increasingly supported the conclusion that the universe was intelligently designed. At the same time, Darwinism has faltered in the face of concrete facts and hard reason. Has science discovered God? At the very least, it’s giving faith an immense boost as new findings emerge about the incredible complexity of our universe. Join Strobel as he reexamines the theories that once led him away from God. Through his compelling account, you’ll encounter the mind-stretching discoveries from cosmology, cellular biology, DNA research, astronomy, physics, and human consciousness that present astonishing evidence in The Case for a Creator.

The case For A Creator

I bought the book and have been reading it. One telling trait that we all have in these types of debates is our own personal bias one way or the other. Indeed, one of the reviews of the book said this much:

quote:
This is the third Strobel "Case" book I've read, and I was definitely less impressed with this one than his previous two books.
More so than in his other books, in this one I was particularly troubled with the fact that he only interviews people who are going to give him the answers he wants. He needs to interview atheists!

The book is a good read so far. In
CHAPTER 4: Where Science Meets Faith a fellow by the name of Dr.Alan Rex Sandage is interviewed. I did a bit of fact checking on the internet and found further information on Dr.Sandage from this webpage

They asked him some questions. His answer here is noteworthy.(he has valid credentials to back up his assertions) Q. Must there necessarily be a conflict between science and religion?

Dr.Sandrage writes:

In my opinion, no, if it is understood that each treats a different aspect of reality. The Bible is certainly not a book of science. One does not study it to find the intensities and the wavelengths of the Balmer spectral lines of hydrogen. But neither is science concerned with the ultimate spiritual properties of the world, which are also real.
Science makes explicit the quite incredible natural order, the interconnections at many levels between the laws of physics, the chemical reactions in the biological processes of life, etc. But science can answer only a fixed type of question. It is concerned with the what, when, and how. It does not, and indeed cannot, answer within its method (powerful as that method is), why.

Why is there something instead of nothing? Why do all electrons have the same charge and mass? Why is the design that we see everywhere so truly miraculous? Why are so many processes so deeply interconnected?

But we must admit that those scientists that want to see design will see design. Those that are content in every part of their being to live as materialistic reductionalists (as we must all do as scientists in the laboratory, which is the place of the practice of our craft) will never admit to a mystery of the design they see, always putting off by one step at a time, awaiting a reductionist explanation for the present unknown. But to take this reductionist belief to the deepest level and to an indefinite time into the future (and it will always remain indefinite) when "science will know everything" is itself an act of faith which denies that there can be anything unknown to science, even in principle. But things of the spirit are not things of science.

There need be no conflict between science and religion if each appreciates its own boundaries and if each takes seriously the claims of the other. The proven success of science simply cannot be ignored by the church. But neither can the church's claim to explain the world at the very deepest level be dismissed. If God did not exist, science would have to (and indeed has) invent the concept to explain what it is discovering at its core. Abelard's 12th century dictum "Truth cannot be contrary to truth. The findings of reason must agree with the truths of scripture, else the God who gave us both has deceived us with one or the other" still rings true.

If there is no God, nothing makes sense. The atheist's case is based on a deception they wish to play upon themselves that follows already from their initial premise. And if there is a God, he must be true both to science and religion. If it seems not so, then one's hermeneutics (either the pastor's or the scientist's) must wrong.

I believe there is a clear, heavy, and immediate responsibility for the church to understand and to believe in the extraordinary results and claims of science. Its success is simply too evident and visible to ignore. It is likewise incumbent upon scientists to understand that science is incapable, because of the limitations of its method by reason alone, to explain and to understand everything about reality. If the world must simply be understood by a materialistic reductionist nihilism, it would make no sense at all. For this, Romans 1:19-21 seems profound. And the deeper any scientist pushes his work, the more profound it does indeed become.

I've not yet perused internet infidels to see what your heroes retort in this book, but shall do so...if only in the name of fair and balanced...

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


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by PaulK, posted 06-28-2019 9:13 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 3 by Taq, posted 06-28-2019 12:04 PM Phat has responded
 Message 4 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-28-2019 1:27 PM Phat has responded
 Message 26 by Sarah Bellum, posted 07-01-2019 11:40 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 7 of 67 (856263)
06-29-2019 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by dwise1
06-28-2019 5:30 PM


Hair Today Gong Tomorrow
dwise1 writes:

...The way I see it, an Actual Creationist would believe in a Creator who did actually create the entire Universe including all the natural forces and processes that operate within that created universe. Therefore, an Actual Creationist would realize that there cannot possibly be a situation of Nature vs God, since God had created Nature. Even though lightning forms entirely through naturalistic processes, that does not in any manner deny God who had created those naturalistic processes. Evolution does not conflict with God, because it is the cumulative results of life (which an Actual Creationist believes was created by God) doing what life does. Even abiogenesis, the origin of life through natural processes, does not conflict with God since, yet again, God had created those natural processes.

Im glad that you can make that argument, though I wonder if you argue academically without understanding belief in general.
I don’t think that preferring rationality to fantasy is subjective. But if that is the way you want to go, I guess you had better stop trying to pretend to be rational.

If you put me on the spot, I doubt whether I could defend why I supposedly understand it. Its just one of those things that you know it when you see it.

Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.


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 5 by dwise1, posted 06-28-2019 5:30 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by dwise1, posted 06-29-2019 10:58 AM Phat has responded
 Message 14 by dwise1, posted 06-29-2019 11:52 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 8 of 67 (856265)
06-29-2019 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tanypteryx
06-28-2019 1:27 PM


Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
Science is based on objective verifiable evidence. If religion is based on objective verifiable evidence there will be no conflict. As far as I am aware, no religion is based on objective verifiable evidence, so..
I would argue that the "religion" of Christianity was never meant to be discerned and accepted based on objective verifiable evidence. Of course there were allegedly a few eyewitnesses to some of the major stories within the NT, but the belief seemingly spread like a wildfire through the people afterwards. One could argue that the spread itself was cause for claiming validity...but arguably Islam spread even faster, so truth cannot be used as the reason.

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 4 by Tanypteryx, posted 06-28-2019 1:27 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Theodoric, posted 06-29-2019 9:00 AM Phat has responded
 Message 13 by ringo, posted 06-29-2019 11:51 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 06-29-2019 1:25 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 9 of 67 (856267)
06-29-2019 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Taq
06-28-2019 12:04 PM


Taq writes:

These apologists seem to be painting themselves into a corner. They are actually agreeing with the argument that if something can be explained through natural causes then God does not exist. They require God to act in contradiction to nature in order for God to create.

If I were you, I would take a look at theistic evolution or go to BioLogos to learn about evolutionary creationism.

In paying true homage to cafeteria Christianity I have never cared much whether Genesis was literally true or not. I saw it all as an allegory or parable. In contrast, I have and do believe that the Resurrection is in fact a literal event and that Jesus Christ was more than a mere man, prophet, or ordinary guy. I doubt whether anyone will be able to prove that either way---I certainly am unimpressed with Richard carrier and the modern mythicists. They seem to have an axe to grind despite their distractive charm and innocence regarding the search for truth. In addition, I believe that we are in a spiritual war and that there are literally principalities, powers, and assignments against the Christian message. Dont ask me why---just call me crazy. My only defense would be to say that if you had walked a mile in my shoes...

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 3 by Taq, posted 06-28-2019 12:04 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by ringo, posted 06-29-2019 11:54 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 12 of 67 (856287)
06-29-2019 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by dwise1
06-29-2019 10:58 AM


Misattribution and Edited Post 7
My apology. I was thinking that I was replying to PaulK in the other topic but somehow pasted in the wrong window, reread the quotes and found they did not make sense and then tried to fix it...in the wrong thread! That was totally my error! Dont stereotype me just yet. I will edit the post.Better yet i will repost it with my corrected reply below:
***************************************************************
dwise1 writes:

...The way I see it, an Actual Creationist would believe in a Creator who did actually create the entire Universe including all the natural forces and processes that operate within that created universe. Therefore, an Actual Creationist would realize that there cannot possibly be a situation of Nature vs God, since God had created Nature. Even though lightning forms entirely through naturalistic processes, that does not in any manner deny God who had created those naturalistic processes. Evolution does not conflict with God, because it is the cumulative results of life (which an Actual Creationist believes was created by God) doing what life does. Even abiogenesis, the origin of life through natural processes, does not conflict with God since, yet again, God had created those natural processes.

phats original comment writes:

Im glad that you can make that argument, though I wonder if you argue academically without understanding belief in general.

At which point I thought about my assertion of understanding belief in general. I then meant to say:

If you put me on the spot, I doubt whether I could defend why I supposedly DO understand belief.. Its just one of those things that you know it when you see it.

Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.


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 11 by dwise1, posted 06-29-2019 10:58 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 18 of 67 (856331)
06-29-2019 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Theodoric
06-29-2019 9:00 AM


Re: Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
Theodoric,refuting my claim of rapidly spreading Christianity writes:

There is no evidence of this. There is actually evidence that it spread very slowly for a few hundred years.
It did not become the major belief until it was co-opted by imperial powers.

Fair enough. The original believers were quite strong and pure, however...based on what they had witnessed. The mythicists throw pseudo facts out there to confuse the layman seeking truth, however. Granted the Christianity peddled by the imperial powers was watered down and adapted to justify secular conquests...that much I wont argue. Throughout the History of Christianity and Christians in general...very few believers were actually that strong in regards to the death to self and adoption of Jesus message and Spirit. There have been notable documented exceptions, however. And this wqould go in line with the many are called and few chosen theology. Its a theme carried forward from the Jewish people. In battle after battle they seldom had a numerical advantage. God likes to show off by using a few to change the world. Nowadays, the secular majority would prefer that our zeal be stamped out and that it is in fact causing more harm than good. We could discuss whether that claim has any validity.

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 10 by Theodoric, posted 06-29-2019 9:00 AM Theodoric has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Theodoric, posted 06-29-2019 9:41 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 19 of 67 (856333)
06-29-2019 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by ringo
06-29-2019 1:37 PM


Re: Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
ringo writes:

You can't include all of those as eyewitnesses.

But I surely would include some even if but a small minority. Perhaps the Upper Room contained them all. But there have been eyewitnesses of the power of the Holy Spirit throughout History. You would cry foul and call for objective verifiable evidence, as would Stile. We never will agree...you and us. But I need to get to work Safeway Beckons...

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 17 by ringo, posted 06-29-2019 1:37 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by ringo, posted 06-29-2019 4:58 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 22 of 67 (856380)
06-30-2019 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by ringo
06-29-2019 4:58 PM


Re: Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
Differing events produce different degrees of eyewitness testimonies. If the observers themselves are unaffected by the event and it merely seems exciting or interesting to them,then yes there will be many versions of what happened. As an example, say a crowd of people see a man fall through the ice at a park. The man is incidental to most---some may feel sorry for the guy and some may have been interrupted while drinking their beer. Thus of course there will be many variations on what was seen and on what occurred.

But what I am trying (unsuccessfully) to get through your thick skulls is that the event and events that I am describing are in fact life changing events for every single one of us. None of you are uninvolved. None of you are detached observers milling about the mall of ideas.

None of you understand or believe this, which is puzzling though expected. The pont that I am making is that you will be affected by the events that earlier eyewitnesses testified about.

ringo writes:

No, you can not include characters in the story as eyewitnesses to the story. That should be obvious. A storyteller saying they were eyewitnesses doesn't make them eyewitnesses.
And even if the event did really happen, you would not get thousands of eyewitnesses telling the same story. You'd get so many different versions that it would be impossible to tell what actually happened.

The story is told not to sell copies nor entertain an audience. The story can arguably be told to manipulate and change public opinion and also be used to further the human agenda of imperial powers, as Theodoric asserts. The story stands or falls on its own merits.
The Gideons explain it this way:
quote:
The Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you.
It is the traveler's map, the pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's sword, and the Christian's charter. Here Paradise is restored, Heaven opened, and the gates of hell disclosed.
CHRIST is its grand subject, our good the design, and the glory of God its end.
It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently, and prayerfully. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure. It is given you in life, will be opened at the judgment, and be remembered forever. It involves the highest responsibility, will reward the greatest labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents.

The fact that you are unimpressed nor moved by the book and its contents is also noted. You are digging your own grave. The book itself is relatively simple. Pulling up contradictions and inconsistencies is simply human attempts at manipulation of interpretation of reality.

Theodoric writes:

Boy. You just moved the goalposts so far that not only are they not on the same field they are not even in the same town anymore.
You admit your argument is wrong and come up with a completely different argument all together.

My argument is ongoing. It is true that you often expose it for being weak or incomplete, but keep in mind that concerning goals and goalposts you and I have different goals. You seek to expose the purpose of organized religion as a sham, scam, and fraud. I seek to defend the statement that the Gideons say above, concerning the Bible:
CHRIST is its grand subject, our good the design, and the glory of God its end.

Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.


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 20 by ringo, posted 06-29-2019 4:58 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2019 2:15 PM Phat has responded
 Message 24 by ringo, posted 06-30-2019 2:16 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 25 of 67 (856416)
06-30-2019 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by ringo
06-30-2019 2:16 PM


Re: Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
I'll concede this point. You have won it. Hope y'all have a good rest of the day.

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 24 by ringo, posted 06-30-2019 2:16 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 29 of 67 (856972)
07-04-2019 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Pressie
07-04-2019 8:50 AM


Of course the question could be reframed. Why is there an intelligence greater than humans which may or may not be friendly?

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 27 by Pressie, posted 07-04-2019 8:50 AM Pressie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Sarah Bellum, posted 07-04-2019 1:40 PM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 30 of 67 (856973)
07-04-2019 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by PaulK
06-30-2019 2:15 PM


Re: Objective Verifiable Reality versus Subjective Experience
You are doing a very good job of making it look like a scam.
Really? That was never my intention. Thanks for the feedback 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 23 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2019 2:15 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 32 of 67 (856998)
07-04-2019 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Sarah Bellum
07-04-2019 1:40 PM


Conversing With Aliens
Indeed. And in the interests of conversation with you, I shall throw my script away and wing it. Im wondering how to send you an audio chat MP3 since i have so darn much to say. Perhaps I will get around to typing it...in which case I shall edit this post..

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 31 by Sarah Bellum, posted 07-04-2019 1:40 PM Sarah Bellum has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Pressie, posted 07-05-2019 8:04 AM Phat has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14961
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 34 of 67 (857187)
07-06-2019 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Pressie
07-05-2019 8:04 AM


Re: Conversing With Aliens
Oh?

  • Define Intelligence

  • Define spooks

    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 33 by Pressie, posted 07-05-2019 8:04 AM Pressie has not yet responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 14961
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 35 of 67 (857908)
    07-13-2019 9:31 AM


    jars logic regarding a Creator
    From another threaad...more appropriately discussed here:
    jar writes:

    Just as Flood Geology defeats Flood Geology, the actual contents of the Bible defeats Biblical Inerrancy.
    Reality always defeats fantasy.

    While many apologists and CCoI Christians continue to speak from willful ignorance, it is hardly evident that all apologists do. Its like I told ringo:
    quote:
    The default standard need not be scientific objectifiable proof in regards to such matters. How would one go about proving God to begin with?

    You have historically argued for Christianity being a philosophical lesson based on reality and have steered clear of ascribing Divinity and/or Omniscience to either GOD or Jesus. Yet you claim to be a "believer". So what is your basic case for a Creator? Why not simply an exploding self creating universe?


    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


    Replies to this message:
     Message 36 by PaulK, posted 07-13-2019 9:44 AM Phat has responded
     Message 37 by jar, posted 07-13-2019 9:58 AM Phat has responded
     Message 47 by ringo, posted 07-13-2019 11:57 AM Phat has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 14961
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 38 of 67 (857911)
    07-13-2019 10:13 AM
    Reply to: Message 37 by jar
    07-13-2019 9:58 AM


    Re: jars logic regarding a Creator
    All you are really saying is that belief--in GOD---perhaps clarified by Jesus Christ (the Nicene Creed)---is irrational, illogical, and unreasonable. So why do you believe?

    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 37 by jar, posted 07-13-2019 9:58 AM jar has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 40 by jar, posted 07-13-2019 10:27 AM Phat has responded

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021