Religion The God Question (continued in Part 2 - link in last post)

god or advanced entity?

  • god

    Votes: 14 40.0%
  • advanced entity

    Votes: 21 60.0%

  • Total voters
    35
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,308
Likes
27,183
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #3,301
1 Corinthians 15: 41

The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor

as far as I know it was popular belief in that time that all star were the same and that they were also countable to humans.
Firstly, you're aware the Sun is a star right?

Secondly bro, 'Science; has a specific meaning.

The scientific method (or simply scientific method) is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring newknowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based onempirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[2] The Oxford English Dictionary says that the scientific method is: "a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Pre the 17th century, the Scientific Method did not exist. People weren't using 'Science' - they were making lucky or educated guesses.

Scientific theory is based on hypothesis, empiricism, test-ability and (importantly) falsifiabilty.

Falsifiability means no Scientific theory is ever 'correct'. It must always be able to be proven wrong, Hence there is no 'fact' of Gravity or 'fact' of Evolution or 'fact' of Relativity; only theories.

The above link is a good read about the method.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Monniehawk

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Posts
3,491
Likes
603
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Monbulk, Upwey, Strathmore
Since I'm human, my statement of "fallible humans" is inclusive of myself. Perception isn't the issue in this case though, because there's objective measures as to which group/s is obeying God and which ones aren't. Doing as God instructs from the bible is that measure. As the bible says: "By their fruit you will recognize them."
I am trying to reconcile all this with past experiences of your posts.
The 'I'm human' reference truly comes across as just a glib nod to reality without any genuine acknowledgement, so it lacks any conviction. I detect very little of the anguish of Paul's 'wretched man' in there. I'm sure you will dispute all this, but.....
...there remains in your posts a constant and underlying conceit of which I am suspicious, if not occasionally outraged. Harsh, indeed, coming from one such as myself!
While having a faith is actually a badge of honour imho, it can equally be a sea anchor to exploring faith and belief if it descends into dogma. Dogma precludes exploration, reinforcing itself within a cocoon of hostile ignorance and righteousness.
I am enjoying a taste of that at this very moment!!
I have made it a mission to encourage you to remove the log, if only briefly. That is not to say that you should immediately divest yourself of all your beliefs, but I am actually concerned that the dogma is stunting your own spiritual growth, and even more concerned that your attitude is actually impairing the faith of other believers.
You may be emerging as counter-productive.
 

tesseract

I am Woman
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Posts
10,059
Likes
1,828
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats, Swan Districts
Yes, they frequently did.

The ancient Greeks (who predated your Bible) stumbled upon a number of theories that we now know to be true.

They didn't use Science either.

Neither did the Mayans or Incas, and their knowledge of the Solar system was pretty freakishly accurate.

Tell me, is this proof of Quetzalcoatl's divinity?



In the passages I provided above, the LORD clearly condoned (and ordered) human sacrifice, and was pleased when it occurred!

Please 'interpret' that away for me.

So, IYO, because it wasn't called science at the time, it wasn't science. You're playing a game of semantics now.

"Stumbled upon" is merely your opinion.


Asked and answered in a broad sense as far as the above question goes. I draw the line at wasting time debunking a debunking websites claims. That's an exercise in futility. For around in circles we'd go.
 

tesseract

I am Woman
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Posts
10,059
Likes
1,828
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats, Swan Districts
I am trying to reconcile all this with past experiences of your posts.
The 'I'm human' reference truly comes across as just a glib nod to reality without any genuine acknowledgement, so it lacks any conviction. I detect very little of the anguish of Paul's 'wretched man' in there. I'm sure you will dispute all this, but.....
...there remains in your posts a constant and underlying conceit of which I am suspicious, if not occasionally outraged. Harsh, indeed, coming from one such as myself!
While having a faith is actually a badge of honour imho, it can equally be a sea anchor to exploring faith and belief if it descends into dogma. Dogma precludes exploration, reinforcing itself within a cocoon of hostile ignorance and righteousness.
I am enjoying a taste of that at this very moment!!
I have made it a mission to encourage you to remove the log, if only briefly. That is not to say that you should immediately divest yourself of all your beliefs, but I am actually concerned that the dogma is stunting your own spiritual growth, and even more concerned that your attitude is actually impairing the faith of other believers.
You may be emerging as counter-productive.

You're free to hold such a view. But you've got nothing when having to resort to going off topic and discuss my online persona.

Btw, counter productive to what? Have I not claimed that I am only commenting, not preaching? If one is interested in spiritual growth, this is not the place I'd recommend for such. One would have to be naive to think the God thread on the SR&P board could be used for spiritual growth. This place should be seen for what it is: an amusing distraction.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,308
Likes
27,183
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #3,306
So, IYO, because it wasn't called science at the time, it wasn't science. You're playing a game of semantics now.
It didn't use the scientific method. Ergo its not Science.

Thats not just semantics.

Please find me a single falsifiable scientific theory in the Bible.

There would have been plenty of people in Biblical times and before who assumed (correctly as it turns out) that the earth was round.

Doesn't mean that they used the Scientific Method to do it though.

Asked and answered in a broad sense as far as the above question goes. I draw the line at wasting time debunking a debunking websites claims. That's an exercise in futility. For around in circles we'd go.
It was a passage from the bible lifted from a webpage.

And your 'debunking' was to claim that Satan did it.

Its a direct passage from the Bible (inspired by the LORD and infallible) claiming that the LORD ordered a follower to sacrifice human beings, which he did, and which made the LORD happy, and made the sacrificer the greatest King of Israel.

Where does the devil enter into that exactly? What different 'interpretation' can I place on that?
 

bombermick

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 28, 2009
Posts
9,737
Likes
1,170
Location
Vermont South
AFL Club
Essendon
"In the beginning God created ..." is not saying "every animal was created almost simultaneously 6000 years ago". The dates in the genealogy have zero to do with when the animals were created. And even if each kind of animal were created almost simultaneously, that's not the same as "every animal was created almost simultaneously 6000 years ago".

Opinions as to morality are subjective. Christianity's stems from an authority, western civilizations doesn't. Western civilization seems to have taken up Luciferianism in this regard, for they've adopted: Do as thou wilt.

I doubt morality is part of the criteria when judging best countries to live according to the UN developmental index. You're really reaching by going down this path.
Genesis clearly has only period of creation, unless you accept the day-gap theory. You haven't outlined your exact belief. The fossil record proves the creation account and the flood wrong. Where is the evidence for a global, catastrophic flood?

The most secular states are clearly the best to live in. They have greater equality, higher levels of GDP per capita and higher lifespans. Or we could always go back to stoning homosexuals.
 

Monniehawk

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Posts
3,491
Likes
603
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Monbulk, Upwey, Strathmore
Pre the 17th century, the Scientific Method did not exist. People weren't using 'Science' - they were making lucky or educated guesses.
Scientific theory is based on hypothesis, empiricism, test-ability and (importantly) falsifiabilty.
Falsifiability means no Scientific theory is ever 'correct'. It must always be able to be proven wrong, Hence there is no 'fact' of Gravity or 'fact' of Evolution or 'fact' of Relativity; only theories.
The above link is a good read about the method.
Might be splitting hairs here, Mal, but the methodology is just a tool of science, I would think. The current method is as described in your post, but it is a method of science. Science was actually a far more generally applied term and discipline than it is now, and was equated to 'knowing' or knowledge than the specifics of today.
After the 16th C, science did manage to free itself from the oppression of ignorance, etc, but it also identified/defined itself by refining a set of disciplines to set it apart from other forms of knowledge. I think there was good and bad in that move.
Sometimes I think science actually replaced one form of intellectual tyranny with another.
But that's another story..
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,308
Likes
27,183
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #3,310
Science was actually a far more generally applied term and discipline than it is now, and was equated to 'knowing' or knowledge than the specifics of today.
I agree.

Im assuming Tesseract was referring to Science in the context of how we use it today (as in the Method and Scientific method of enquiry into reality). I.e. the formulation of falsifiable empirical and peer reviewed theories to describe an objective truth about state and nature of the universe.

I'm fairly certain that he wouldnt count Philosophy or other forms of epistemology as 'Science' (as they were back in the day).
 

Monniehawk

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Posts
3,491
Likes
603
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Monbulk, Upwey, Strathmore
You're free to hold such a view. But you've got nothing when having to resort to going off topic and discuss my online persona.
Oh? I thought the title of 'captain obvious' that you imposed on me earlier released licence on the board....
However, it was your attitude rather than persona that I was referring to.
I have stayed on topic. it is the God Question. A rather expansive title, that.
Btw, counter productive to what? Have I not claimed that I am only commenting, not preaching? If one is interested in spiritual growth, this is not the place I'd recommend for such. One would have to be naive to think the God thread on the SR&P board could be used for spiritual growth. This place should be seen for what it is: an amusing distraction.
You have claimed to be only commenting.
YOU are the only one responsible for your spiritual growth. It can happen anywhere. Or not. Up to you - not your gods, but you.
"Counter-productive" to your evangelical mission. If evangelism was not the point, then you would hardly be expounding legalistic xianity on a footy forum with the fervour that you do. It currently is reinforcing some old negatives. You do your gods a disservice, I think.
Then again, perhaps you are seeking the affirmation of your ideas by reinforcing them yourself.
Just open your eyes a little more and cease the barking dog defence mode.
Hold your faith and beliefs, but test them against others.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Posts
1,477
Likes
219
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Denver, UO, NY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Pre the 17th century, the Scientific Method did not exist. People weren't using 'Science' - they were making lucky or educated guesses.

Scientific theory is based on hypothesis, empiricism, test-ability and (importantly) falsifiabilty.

Falsifiability means no Scientific theory is ever 'correct'. It must always be able to be proven wrong, Hence there is no 'fact' of Gravity or 'fact' of Evolution or 'fact' of Relativity; only theories.

The above link is a good read about the method.
Is that the definition of science or scientific method? you were asking for science in the bible and whether it was studied or a theory at the time is irrelevant as the bible says that each star is different and this is before you say science (methods) was around so it can go to show that it was the knowledge of God instead of man.
 

tesseract

I am Woman
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Posts
10,059
Likes
1,828
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats, Swan Districts
It didn't use the scientific method. Ergo its not Science.

Thats not just semantics.

Please find me a single falsifiable scientific theory in the Bible.

There would have been plenty of people in Biblical times and before who assumed (correctly as it turns out) that the earth was round.

Doesn't mean that they used the Scientific Method to do it though.



It was a passage from the bible lifted from a webpage.

And your 'debunking' was to claim that Satan did it.

Its a direct passage from the Bible (inspired by the LORD and infallible) claiming that the LORD ordered a follower to sacrifice human beings, which he did, and which made the LORD happy, and made the sacrificer the greatest King of Israel.

Where does the devil enter into that exactly? What different 'interpretation' can I place on that?

Mal, now you're repeating yourself and going in circles.

If you want something found for your own knowledge, look it up yourself if you're interested. I'm tiring of your requests. So expect the same answer from any further requests.

Nowhere did I say "Satan did it." The post was pointing you in the direction to find the answer to the main premise of the bible. To understand this helps with the understanding of Josiah's actions and the prophecy of David's lineage and the coming Messiah. The pagan priests broke a law that carried the death sentence.

As for Jephthah, God expects vows to be kept. As the bible says: Let your yes mean yes and your no mean no. Btw, you're attributing something to God that was Jephthah's doing.
 

Monniehawk

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Posts
3,491
Likes
603
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Monbulk, Upwey, Strathmore
I'm fairly certain that he wouldnt count Philosophy or other forms of epistemology as 'Science' (as they were back in the day).
Well, much of the science world wouldn't either, I guess.
Some still reject Biology or even Chemistry as being 'real' science amid gruff cries of "Bahh! Humbug!!"

Though, I'm not sure that a consensus of scientists is a convincing argument in this area, given the all-too-often arrogance of some scientists.
 

tesseract

I am Woman
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Posts
10,059
Likes
1,828
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats, Swan Districts
Oh? I thought the title of 'captain obvious' that you imposed on me earlier released licence on the board....
However, it was your attitude rather than persona that I was referring to.
I have stayed on topic. it is the God Question. A rather expansive title, that.

You have claimed to be only commenting.
YOU are the only one responsible for your spiritual growth. It can happen anywhere. Or not. Up to you - not your gods, but you.
"Counter-productive" to your evangelical mission. If evangelism was not the point, then you would hardly be expounding legalistic xianity on a footy forum with the fervour that you do. It currently is reinforcing some old negatives. You do your gods a disservice, I think.
Then again, perhaps you are seeking the affirmation of your ideas by reinforcing them yourself.
Just open your eyes a little more and cease the barking dog defence mode.
Hold your faith and beliefs, but test them against others.
My online persona / attitude is well off topic. I'll indulge no more like posts of yours. If it bothers you how I comment, put me on ignore. I don't plan on changing just to suit you.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,308
Likes
27,183
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #3,318
Is that the definition of science or scientific method? you were asking for science in the bible and whether it was studied or a theory at the time is irrelevant.
Its totally relevant.

Saying the Biblical authors applied science to phenomena is plain wrong. The witnessed phenomena and then kinda made up an explanation that felt right. None of their theories contained shred of falsifiability, and in fact many of those explanations were plainly unfalsifiable (i.e. God did it).

I'm no fan of science here by the way. I'm agnostic. Science (while really useful) has a shitload of fundamental flaws.

This is where you and Tesseract get trapped. You're trying to use logic and reason to prove something that cant be proved with logic and reason. In fact logically, your position is patently absurd.

As a hint, use faith. Start there and end there. Dont waiver. Scientists use faith too (they make assumptions about the state of the universe).

Use faith and you cant lose.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Posts
33,308
Likes
27,183
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Moderator #3,320
To understand this helps with the understanding of Josiah's actions and the prophecy of David's lineage and the coming Messiah. The pagan priests broke a law that carried the death sentence.
God didn't call for the death sentence. He called for Human Sacrifice. On an altar. And after the slaughter he was happy. Just like the Aztec Gods did.

Not a God I particularly want to believe in.

In fact, I actively pray that a God that calls for the merciless slaying of members of rival faiths doesn't exist.


You're attributing something to God that was Jephthah's doing.
Actually im just pointing out that God condoned it.

Gotta keep your word to God and all that. Even if it means murdering your own virgin daughter.

You get into Heaven that way.

Seriously tapped religion you have there.
 

Tassieboy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Posts
13,795
Likes
4,969
Location
kanamaluka
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Hurricanes
What specific assumptions do scientists make, though? They make assumptions and from there test their models to prove this assumption, but don't just make assumptions and use these assumptions to prove other models, to my knowledge anyhow.
 

Hard_to_Beat

Brownlow Medallist
Suspended
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Posts
11,162
Likes
6,002
AFL Club
North Melbourne
why does this lie on a theist when the atheists were the ones going against popular belief? when you can effectily disprove God I'll turn atheist
I have no time for your infantile thought games which are solely designed to reinforce your absurd superstitions.

You MUST by extension of your simpleton logic, place your deity on the same shelf as unicorns, goblins and elves.

Next time you get physically ill, back your convictions in your god by dismissing the men and women of medical science, and stay home and pray instead.

The gene pool will thank you. I'm personally sick and tired of you people acting as a mill stone upon the human race.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Posts
1,477
Likes
219
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Denver, UO, NY
I have no time for your infantile thought games which are solely designed to reinforce your absurd superstitions.
no they're not. I'm asking you genuinely here why should atheism be accepted as right and theist do all the work to disprove your theory of life for others to see otherwise?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom