Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battle Royale VII Specific discussion thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LightSon
    replied
    Originally posted by Aussie Thinker
    Imagine if it had shown knowledge that we could only verify NOW with modern science.. then it would be something worth taking notice of..

    But of course.. it shows nothing but bronze age mens view of the world.. and in fact is incredibly boringly consistent with every other primitive manuscript…
    HOw about this.
    Job 26:7
    [God] stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

    So much for medieval flat-Earth idiots.
    Job's God inspired observation is not bad for coming 3000 years before Copernican theory.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Thinker
    replied
    Bob,

    I happen to believe (based on scripture) that time exists independently of the physical universe.
    I think we were interested to know in which part of scripture do they mention time existing independently of the universe.

    In fact doesn’t it ever surprise you that the Bible ONLY ever shows knowledge that MEN knew at the time. I would think if it were inspired by God it would have shown some amazing revelation about the universe.

    Imagine if it had shown knowledge that we could only verify NOW with modern science.. then it would be something worth taking notice of..

    But of course.. it shows nothing but bronze age mens view of the world.. and in fact is incredibly boringly consistent with every other primitive manuscript…

    Sad that this doesn’t give you a clue !

    But then your God seems to be a tricky guy who won’t even obviously reveal himself now (when it would clear everything up) and lays down all this misinformation about evolution and ancient planets etc..
    Last edited by Aussie Thinker; September 15, 2003, 08:14 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • bob b
    replied
    I would be amused to see your evidence to the contrary.

    Leave a comment:


  • taoist
    replied
    As far as I'm aware (small joke), there are no observations available outside the physical universe. But I'd be amused at least to see what your scriptural references are on that point, bob b.

    Leave a comment:


  • bob b
    replied
    What IS the "creation of the universe"?
    You can not call it an "event" since events take place in time, and time is not existing in that case.
    I happen to believe (based on scripture) that time exists independently of the physical universe.

    Do you or anyone here have any evidence to the contrary?

    Leave a comment:


  • LightSon
    replied
    Originally posted by attention
    Well, it is a fixious idea in the heads of people that assume unreasonable things.
    Sorry to be pedantic, but what is "fixious"? I can't find it in my dictionary.

    Or perhaps you meant one of the following?

    1. factitious: not spontaneous or natural; artificial; contrived

    2. fictitious: created, taken, or assumed for the sake of concealment; not genuine; false

    3. fictitious: of, pertaining to, or consisting of fiction; imaginatively produced or set forth; created by the imagination

    Leave a comment:


  • attention
    replied
    Originally posted by bob b
    The creation of the universe is unlike every other event that occurs once the universe has come into existence.

    Thus it is incorrect to equate the creation of the universe to events which happen in the universe once it has been created.

    Science typically concerns itself with events that occur within the physical universe. Once it strays from this it is no longer really science but instead is philosophy.
    What IS the "creation of the universe"?
    You can not call it an "event" since events take place in time, and time is not existing in that case.
    So, it isn't even realy an event, it is not something that takes place at some moment in time and at some point in space.

    What IS it then?
    Well, it is a fixious idea in the heads of people that assume unreasonable things.

    It is a reasonng that takes induction outside of it's defined context and reasons as follows:
    1. all things that exist, have begun to exist.
    2. the universe is a "thing" that exists
    3. thus, the universe began at some point in time.

    The error in the logic is that:
    1. everything that begins to exist, does not start in or from nothing, but from previous pre-existing causes and existence forms.

    2. a property of an element of a collection, is not necesseraly a property of the collection of those elements. Like an integer is an element of the set of all integers, and has the property that by adding one, you still get an integer. But you can't add one to the set of integers. etc.

    3. The proper definition of the universe is all existence forms in all space and all time. I realy can not have a start in time, since that would imply it would have started from nothing. But nothing is not a begin of anything.

    Leave a comment:


  • bob b
    replied
    Aussie thinker,

    If you can not differentiate between the event that created the universe and events which have occurred once the universe was created then I am sorry for you.

    The fact that all events which occur within the physical universe are logically considered by most people to be natural provides zero support for the proposition that the creation of the physical universe itself must therefore have also been a "natural" event.

    You can believe that if you wish, but neither logic nor science provides support for that position.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Thinker
    replied
    Bob,

    So now we can just declare something and it is true..

    Sorry.. that isn;t how it works for me !

    Leave a comment:


  • bob b
    replied
    The creation of the universe is unlike every other event that occurs once the universe has come into existence.

    Thus it is incorrect to equate the creation of the universe to events which happen in the universe once it has been created.

    Science typically concerns itself with events that occur within the physical universe. Once it strays from this it is no longer really science but instead is philosophy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Thinker
    replied
    Bob

    So why do you believe fairytales like the universe created itself and life appeared by naturalistic means?
    I don’t “believe” in anything. However it is a good bet to assume the universe had a natural beginning.. why ???

    Because everything EVER known has had a natural origin.

    Everything ever discovered = Natural
    Every scientific explanation = Natural
    Only known source for everything = Natural

    Yet you somehow jump to a God at some stage.. that just doesn’t make sense !

    You haven't stopped believing in fairytales at all. You simply have substituted one set of fabulous stories for another under the mistaken belief that the new ones are "scientific" and hence more worthy of your adoption of them into your worldview..
    The Natural explanations proposed are offered up by scientists based on what we DO know and the evidence that DOES exist. It is offered up with NO agenda.

    Mythological religious explanations are based on ancient stories with NO evidence. Not only that they are contradictory and illogical and HEAVILY agenda driven.

    Science start with evidence and looks for an answer that fit it.

    Religion starts with the answer and looks for evidence to fit it.

    I know which ones still uses fairy tales !

    Leave a comment:


  • bob b
    replied
    Most of us stopped believing fairy tales after kindergarten.
    So why do you believe fairytales like the universe created itself and life appeared by naturalistic means?

    You haven't stopped believing in fairytales at all. You simply have substituted one set of fabulous stories for another under the mistaken belief that the new ones are "scientific" and hence more worthy of your adoption of them into your worldview..

    Leave a comment:


  • Aussie Thinker
    replied
    Just like to take a look at Bob’s neat little end conclusions:

    BE: We Know God Exists: because:
    1. the universe could not always have been here, nor could it have made itself from nothing
    We don’t know that at all. Further more the same can be said for God.. he could not have always existed or could not have made himself.

    2. even the basic functions of biological life are irreducibly and wildly complex and could not originate by the laws of physics
    The basic functions of life follow the laws of physics ALWAYS. Pleas name me ONE that doesn’t. Why does complexity imply a God anyway ?

    [quote]3. consciousness, that is, self-awareness is non-physical and could not arise from atoms and molecules[/quote}

    So says Bob !.. self awareness is a result of having a large enough brain. Even Cats and Dogs are self aware.. they know it themselves in the mirror. Our consciousness is just a result of an evolutionary process that provided us with high intelligence. Why is God implied by it ?

    4. only a moral God can account for absolute right and wrong and the human conscience
    Absolute right and wrong are human invented concepts .. just like God. I always find it just a little hilarious when morals are attributed to a God instead of man.. when man made up the God in the first place.

    5. the laws of physics cannot account for broad and extraordinary features of the solar system
    Yes they can.. we just need to learn them all. The ridiculous “coincidences” in the Solar system don’t even line up exactly like Bob declares they do.. his “extraordinary” features are full of ALMOST ½ and NEARLY 40 % etc etc. As we find out more about other Solar systems it seems there are perfectly natural explanations for solar system shape and formation and features.

    6. even if evolution were possible, apart from supervision, even the simplest proteins would each require trillions of years to form
    Bob thinks this because of his failed attempt at mathematics. No wonder he dropped out of his course. Time and time again I have told him he fails to take into account no of iterations and the locking in place of beneficial results.

    7. human behavior indicates the existence of the soul and spirit and the real existence of ideas indicate the existence of a non-physical reality
    Human behvious indicates and intelligent being who has empathy for fellow humans and strives to understand or provide reasons for natural happenings. When reason aren’t forthcoming humans have generally opted for Gap Gods.

    8. higher biological functions like sight, flight, and echo-location are so wildly and irreducibly complex they could not evolve in stages
    I fully explained how all these functions not only occurred naturally but how we still have intermediate forms in existence today of all the necessary steps.

    9. apart from the existence of God, logic and reason have no foundation, and thus leading atheists deny the objective nature of the laws of logic
    Logic and reason are human concepts formed by our large intelligence as tools to explain our universe. Again it is ironic that a human could claim that a human invention implies a God (which is another human invention) exists !

    10. God has revealed Himself uniquely in the Bible and confirmed its claims through scientific statements, prophecies, and many other wonderful proofs that God became flesh in Jesus Christ, who was crucified by Pontius Pilate, and rose from the dead on the third day, according to the Scriptures, and that those who trust in Him will have everlasting life.
    God is written about in the Bible and a hundred other religious mythologies. He is written about by MAN who is making up stories. Most of us stopped believing fairy tales after kindergarten. The need for “everlasting” life is what drives man to fall prey to the fantasy of a God !

    Leave a comment:


  • Spartin
    replied
    Originally posted by Poly
    Ok, here's a question. Did you come to the conclusion that Christianity is just another fallible religion after thoroughly investigating it and studying the bible or did you come to this conclusion mostly due to what others had to say about it?

    It was a combination of both. I did spend a number of years in the flock. Not a scholar but familiar with it. Everything that I did hear I would always try to look for a source and something to verify its' validity. Alot of the time there was no grounds based upon. Sometimes it did. I just couldn't accept certain things in the bible as true where I was told that the book was 100% true. That was the beginning of the end for me in Christianity. I personally believe that the Bible is written by Man for Man. Man's judgement is clouded (Maybe mine is right now ) hence the problems I have with the book. Who knows? This helps me figure out where I am and where I am going. I dislike answering questions like this, but it is all part of the journey.


    Spartin

    Leave a comment:


  • Spartin
    replied
    Originally posted by LightSon
    Spartin,
    Could you tell us about your God and religion? Or do they have conventional names? I'm curious what your religious orientation is.
    Thanks

    My belief system isn't conventional. As far as I know, I am the one person who believes the way I do. It does have a large flavouring of Christianity, for the moral grounds on how to treat your fellow man etc. (I was a Christian for a number of years) I don't believe in adultery or any other sin that hurts your fellow man/woman. I just know God is out there and is watching us. I don't know exactly how to explain it mind you. This isn't one of my big voiced topics. It is more of a feeling than a documented thing for me. It makes more sense to me now than three years ago. I believe in three more years I will understand more. I wish I could articulate myself better but unfortunaly I can't at this time in my life . In a couple years I will be better equipped to answer this but at this time, I guess I just need that, time. Part of the reason I am here. To pickup some more thoughts and understanding on the whole thing. Frustrating at times but so far it has been worth it.


    Spartin

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X