Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: BucsGuru and/or White Tiger « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4

BucsGuru

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6397
Offline
#30 : April 01, 2010, 11:42:04 PM

It is hard to take in....the whole garden thing.

God creates man for companionship...in HIS image.  Meaning, we are powerful...and had dominion over the earth.

God wants us to "choose" him rather than be some dictator and say worship me!  So instead of "mad scientist", he creates the tree and the rule to not eat of it so we can make a choice to choose him, or not.  Of course, he did tell us what would happen if we chose curtain #2.

So, purpose for tree: choice.  We would be nothing more than puppets had God simply created us and commanded us to do everything!  He also knew that the fallen angels and Satan would come to tempt.  We all have to make a choice.


Still doesn't make since does it?  Or it does?  You have to go through it, to really get to it.  Sometimes where we are in life predicts what will make sense to us. 

BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
#31 : April 02, 2010, 12:50:53 AM

Nope, not that I am aware of, but to be blunt, what would be the point? It is what it is and history cannot be changed.

What if scenarios are always interesting, fiction or nonfiction..... and, btw, that's not history.


The White Tiger

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11371
Offline
#32 : April 02, 2010, 02:17:05 AM

TWT - your point about the limits of scientific enquiry are very true indeed, will we as a species live long enough to know the answer one way or another? Honestly, i doubt it, unless we learn how to colonise another solar body soon. Maybe we will though, and maybe scientific enquiry will develop into the knowledge that The Big Bang was God, after all, science cannot even begin to touch on how so much matter in the universe came from suppsedly nothing and it's the scientific concept i have most difficulty with.

I didn't touch on it, but that's precisely my issue - everything from nothing (all matter from nothing), order out of randomness.

No, i'd never read any Kant, never even heard of him/her to be honest. My reading habits as a child were on such things as nature, astronomy, dinosaurs and they stayed the same ever since. If you can recommend his best work though i'll keep an eye out for it at Waterstone's (a UK national chain of book-shops, if it's anywhere, it'll be there).

I wouldn't suggest reading a lot of Kant (17th century philosopher) - I'm no expert on him - and his stuff is so boring and so thick it's not something you sit down with a cup of tea to read by the fire on a cold evening.

I believe Kant set out to find a middle-way between competing ideas on how to know "truth" - only using the senses (empiricists), or that we know truth by the intellect, not the senses, and that the intellect possesses its own “innate ideas.” (rationalism).

In the end he apparently gave up - his great offering to philosophy is he became the very first to decide that "truth" is subjective...All previous philosophers had assumed that truth was objective.

I do think Kant and Locke helped influence political philosophy - I think some smart guys lifted a  concept that religion should not be a tool of government to keep the governed in line, but that religion should be what guides those to whom we loan our power.

I woyuld argue a couple of points though, even the fact that you and i are having this conversation i would suggest proves that your mind can think outside of cause and effect, yours and the beleifs of 6 billion others prove it, i reckon. Unless i've misunderstood it.

Yeah, I agree - I've heard it said that God prefers an honest atheist to a dishonest theist...don't think God minds honest questioning.

Also, although yes, science is considered by the mind and dependent upon experiment, the belief that it has limitations in this way i think makes a mockery of discovery, 550 years ago the mind could only consider to earth to be flat and that the sun went round the earth, that's the most obvious example where people have thought outside of what the mind is usually thinking. Thinking beyond what we know to be true i believe is what makes science (and by science i mean specifically Physics) so interesting, String theory and theories on the multiverse would blow most people's minds.

Well, somehow man lost sight of what was in the Bible:

In Job 26:7 - The Bible describes the suspension of the Earth in space:

"He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing."

In Ecclesiastes 1:6 the Bible describes the circulation of the atmosphere:

The wind goes toward the south,
And turns around to the north;
The wind whirls about continually,
And comes again on its circuit.

In Job 28:25 the Bible includes some principles of fluid dynamics (The fact that air has "weight" was proven scientifically only about 300 years ago. The relative weights of air and water are needed for the efficient functioning of the world’s hydrologic cycle, which in turn sustains life on the earth):

To establish a weight for the wind,
And apportion the waters by measure.

Thanks to the assertion by the poster John Galt? I found something interesting regarding "biogenesis" - In Genesis the Bible describes biogenesis (the development of living organisms from other living organisms) and the stability of each kind of living organism (ok JG? you'll have to allow some license for the use of "kinds"):

Genesis 1:11,12
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:21
So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:25
And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

(**The phrase “according to its kind” occurs repeatedly, stressing the reproductive integrity of each kind of animal and plant. Today we know this occurs because all of these reproductive systems are programmed by their genetic codes.)

In Isaiah 40:22 the Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

The Pope may have been a "flat-Earther - but the Bible was not.

Your idea about man's intelligence being such because god made it so intrigued me a lot, The ability to think laterally, communicate through complex speech and language, love, hate and so on...couldn't you argue that 'because god made it so' and 'because evolution made it possible' are pretty much the same level of argument? My contention is that some species had to be at the top of the cognitive ability tree on earth, just so happens we are that species.

I'd say there's a stark difference - in the first, my belief allows for it while evolution does not.

God specifically designed man with the capacity for higher reason, unlike animals - there simply isn't anything like it in the animal Kingdom - man's spirit yearned to know and to be known. To love and be loved...he employed the cognitive ability to describe his world, his place in it, and his desires.

I am convinced that there is some part of every human that when he looks into sky he contemplates God.

Evolutionary theory poses something very intriguing - a process entirely devoid of any cause or purpose, acting completely randomly - but in a completely orderly fashion - to assesses a situation, design a response to input, and commit to a path, then compares results!

Evolution as a distributed network, complete with feedback-loops, decision-trees leading to root cause analysis, corrective actions and critical paths...down-right intelligent!

...except it's not.

It just happens(?).

Simply because something needs to happen - it does? Not logical.

The Bible actually offers an explanation for life's origins - sly atheists infer that higher life evolved from lower life - they even make it sound plausible that lower forms of different kinds, types...forms evolved from...yet they don't admit that they believe something they cannot prove...that ALL life came from primordial ooze, or "aliens" made it happen, or anything but that silly God theory...when you give me a theory that explains a process (kind-of), but you cannot describe the origins of life - then you are using faith.

Quote from: YoozaHo link=topic=55749.msg1188520#msg1188520 date=12701origin01170
The thought of evil being a man-made invention....can't argue with that but i would also say that the whole morality scale is a man made invention. Not just the bottom end. And it's through our increased cognitive ability that generally we've been able to leave behind ideas that we can end anothers life or take what is not ours. A belief not shared by any other species on earth. So one could argue that if god is responsible that man is his favourite creature since he gave us free will, all this thinking power above any other creature as well as the potential to be moral and civil but it leaves a very big question of why?

Well, if any man is justified to create his own social standard for God's "absolute morality" - substitute his standard for God's - that allows man to change truth - if man can change some truth, then there isn't ANY truth.

Think about that, because that concept would allow Hitler, Lenin, and Stalin...to establish their standards. From what I've read they considered themselves very altruistic...especially in the beginning.

I think what you describe is that if we are created, then we must have a purpose - and I think our capacity, ability and senses should follow the inspiration of our God-given intellect to discover that purpose.   

In the end, there is only one honest reason for believing anything: because it is true.

Quote from: YoozaHo link=topic=55749.msg1188520#msg1188520 date=12701origin01170
This phrase baffled me a little, "Through Christ man now has the choice to un-decide". If you believe god gave us free will then how can we un-decide something? That sounds like free will given, then taken away. 'youre allowed to do what you want...actually, no, youre not'. Can you just clarify a touch?

Christianity argues from the same premise - that the moral law does in fact come from God - therefore man is not autonomous. Meaning, regardless of mans desire - the mere fact that he was created makes him subject to a higher/supreme being's morality.

Man is free to choose to obey or disobey the moral law, but he is not free to create the law itself, nor can he escape the consequences.

If you can conceive the concept of a supreme being, and that this supreme being is interventionist enough to create man - is it logical that the creation should confine the deity to their concepts of morality?

I suggest that it would not be logical. God created man, he gave him a choice between good and evil and even told him not to choose the evil or man would be subject to dire consequences (separation from a relationship from an interventionist God). Man chose evil - but only a little bit - and when questioned he lied and blamed someone else...and it has continued. Man wants a relationship with God, God wants a relationship with man - so he becomes man in the person of Jesus Christ. That man fulfills ALL the requirements of absolute morality - and then he lays down his life for ALL men to bring them back to a relationship with God (and God with mankind). All that is required is that each man must individually acknowledge his condition for failing Gods standard (our indebted condition) - then accept Jesus Christs sacrifice as payment in full for our debt - and his leadership for our continuing life.

I didn't mean to get preachy - I just didn't want to assume that you knew the condition of man from the viewpoint of Christianity's God - because you asked about his plan to about how man can "un-decide" - so I listed Gods process for restoration.

Incomparable sig by Incognito

Obamessiah

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1219
Offline
#33 : April 02, 2010, 09:54:43 AM

Simply because something needs to happen - it does? Not logical.

Probably why only Creationists can find this excerpt in the theory of evolution.

Obamessiah

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1219
Offline
#34 : April 02, 2010, 09:56:56 AM

Evolutionary theory poses something very intriguing - a process entirely devoid of any cause or purpose, acting completely randomly - but in a completely orderly fashion - to assesses a situation, design a response to input, and commit to a path, then compares results!

Perhaps the poorest understanding of evolution I have ever seen. No wonder you don't believe in it, you just can't understand it.


BucsBullsBolts

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4823
Offline
#35 : April 02, 2010, 10:32:17 AM

In Isaiah 40:22 the Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,

"Circle" is not always synonymous with spherical ......

Scholty

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1374
Offline
#36 : April 02, 2010, 11:02:55 AM

Okay, I have to admit....  this is one of the best 'civil' threads I have read so far since I've been on the Red Board.

*******************************Luck happens when hard work meets opportunity.

The White Tiger

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11371
Offline
#37 : April 02, 2010, 01:54:25 PM

Evolutionary theory poses something very intriguing - a process entirely devoid of any cause or purpose, acting completely randomly - but in a completely orderly fashion - to assesses a situation, design a response to input, and commit to a path, then compares results!

Perhaps the poorest understanding of evolution I have ever seen. No wonder you don't believe in it, you just can't understand it.



No, it isn't that I don't understand it - it;s that I reject your hidden premise. You justify unbelief by your belief that evolution answers all the questions - except you can't exactly tell me how it started without applying a little faith.

You like to separate the two precisely because you have no plausible explanation. I asked you about abiogenesis - do you remember what you said? It's faith until something plausible reveals your hypothesis.

Lets be clear - the only problem I have with evolution is it has no origin - and I reject cross-speciation. I believe life can make small adaptions - just not make a jump to a new species.

There's another philosophical problem - if evolution is natural, why do we suspend our convictions when life is impacted by something mankind does? It seems to me a little specious to ask humans to stop being human so we can protect spotted owls in Washington, rare multi-colored rodents on a farmers land in California?

Seems like man is going to a great effort to protect some of the weakest in our society - if natural selection wants to thin the heard - who does man think he is to interfere with the process?

Incomparable sig by Incognito

spartan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 7093
Offline
#38 : April 02, 2010, 02:03:32 PM

Nope, not that I am aware of, but to be blunt, what would be the point? It is what it is and history cannot be changed.

What if scenarios are always interesting, fiction or nonfiction..... and, btw, that's not history.


Whether you believe in God and/or Jesus is neither here not there, but a boat load of history has occurred since he died, a lot of it involving him, in his name, in the defense of his name or inspired by him. That's is what I was referring to.

Obamessiah

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1219
Offline
#39 : April 02, 2010, 02:31:15 PM

I asked you about abiogenesis - do you remember what you said?

The same thing I always say = abiogenesis and evolution are different theories and not dependent on one another. This is why it has become so tiresome to talk to you, it's just the same thing over and over. I have never wavered from this position. You want to connect the two but cannot, and just bullheadedly keep trying to twist the facts and contort my position to support your agenda. It hasn't worked, it isn't working, and it will never work. Give it a rest already. Evolution is not dependent on abiogenesis, and you can't make me feel obligated to defend the nascent theory of abiogenesis, or tie the validity of evolution to it, no matter how much you would like to.


Obamessiah

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1219
Offline
#40 : April 02, 2010, 02:37:20 PM

I believe life can make small adaptions - just not make a jump to a new species.

And yet another demonstration that you don't understand evolution, or are deliberately distorting it. Evolution does not say that a frog suddenly turned into a cow. You've also demonstrated your lack of an ability to grasp the bigger picture. You can see small changes over a short period of time, but you can't see how these changes continue to add up over a longer time scale. In order to support your view, you must myopically examine only a small section of the evolutionary period while deliberately ignoring the larger portion. Willful ignorance.


The White Tiger

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11371
Offline
#41 : April 02, 2010, 03:14:38 PM

In Isaiah 40:22 the Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical.

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,

"Circle" is not always synonymous with spherical ......

Ah, but if it sometimes does, then the argument is valid.

Notice I didn't fill a page with more of that (I could), or evidence of the historical and geographical proof of the Bible (I have).

Questions belie dissatisfaction - I have made a philosophical case for mans need to have an absolute morality (not having one denies the moral authority for one man to act against someone else's morality - even when that morality allows them to mistreat/exploit the weak in society).

An absolute morality requires a supreme being. That makes the case for "a" God.

I submit that Christianity's God best fits that requirement. Christianity has been proven to benefit free men in democracies, Christianity's supporting text is historically and geographically accurate - it meets the requirement for a supreme being with an absolute morality. Man would not, and as history shows, does not impose limits on himself. His nature is to push against ANY standard. It is illogical to assume that you can continually weaken standards that uphold our culture and society - without it having some effect. Morality is the foundation for law which is the linchpin support for society and culture.

That ability has caused mankind's problems - man isn't just struggling against an absolute - man struggles against limits of any kind.

Incomparable sig by Incognito

The White Tiger

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 11371
Offline
#42 : April 02, 2010, 03:19:28 PM

I believe life can make small adaptions - just not make a jump to a new species.

And yet another demonstration that you don't understand evolution, or are deliberately distorting it. Evolution does not say that a frog suddenly turned into a cow. You've also demonstrated your lack of an ability to grasp the bigger picture. You can see small changes over a short period of time, but you can't see how these changes continue to add up over a longer time scale. In order to support your view, you must myopically examine only a small section of the evolutionary period while deliberately ignoring the larger portion. Willful ignorance.



Actually your theory suggests that the changes might, or they might not...

I say emphatically - this is wrong.

IF - it could - it would prop up all those atheists teaching our young.

It doesn't so they do as you do - divorce the two - make them completely independent while inferring that they do.

Incomparable sig by Incognito

John Galt?

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 18831
Offline
#43 : April 02, 2010, 03:52:39 PM

Lets be clear - the only problem I have with evolution is it has no origin


Why is that a problem? Do you need to know the origins of heat/energy to accept thermodynamics? Does a turbine spin any differently if the heat is from coal vs oil vs solar vs nuclear? If someone states that Valence Bond Theory shows that hydrogen and oxygen share electrons in a molecule of water, do you argue that it is wrong because the Theory doesn't state where atoms come from?



- and I reject cross-speciation. I believe life can make small adaptions - just not make a jump to a new species.


there are no "jumps" in evolution. If there are small adaptions 10 million years ago, and then there are more small adaptions, and more small adaptions on and on for millions of years, you end up with millions and millions of small adaptions which when combined look like a big change.

A good example of cross speciation is horses and deer. About 50 mya (million years ago) there were tapir-like critters living in the dense jungles eating tender plants that were abundant. But in the northern edges of these jungles, the climate started drying and grasses became more abundant and the tapir like critters in the north that had flatter tougher teeth did better. As the jungle became less dense, longer legs became an advantage. Over a few million years, the jungles became savanahs or forests. The long legged critters in the savannahs developed even longer legs (because there was little to hide behind) and much hardier teeth for eating only grasses, while in the forests the critters didn't need to get as big/husky and adapted to run around the numerous tress to escape and since there were still plenty of tender shoots, they didn't need the tough teeth. In the grass lands the critters found bulk and straight ahead speed an advantage, while in the forests, agility and quick turning were more advantageous. So after 50 million years you have big husky horses and smaller much more agile deer. 2 different species! And you still have the tapirs way down south in the dense jungles.




There's another philosophical problem - if evolution is natural, why do we suspend our convictions when life is impacted by something mankind does? It seems to me a little specious to ask humans to stop being human so we can protect spotted owls in Washington, rare multi-colored rodents on a farmers land in California?


cause man is often stupid.


Seems like man is going to a great effort to protect some of the weakest in our society - if natural selection wants to thin the heard - who does man think he is to interfere with the process?

That is called "lack-of-intelligence Design"


BucsGuru

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 6397
Offline
#44 : April 02, 2010, 04:02:17 PM

so edgy lately John?  Sip the beer squirrel.
Page: 1 2 3 4
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: BucsGuru and/or White Tiger « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools