Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I loathe about the pro science is that they think these scientists MADE the universe!!! FYI, ALL OF WHAT SCIENCE HAS SPOUTED WERE ALL DISCOVERIES!!!!
They just found out HOW the universe works and suddenly they are the be all and end all
Go scratch atheists like siriusly!
Q: what does "siriusly" mean? Are you referring to the star Sirius perhaps?
Anyhow, what total loud-mouthed & unsupportable bunko! Nope, that's not what we professionals think AT ALL! EVER. Where did you get such a totally nutzo idea from? Or are you just being insulting and hostile because that's all yah got? I suspect so!
We scientists know that curious and unproven things first need to be hypothesized, then tested, then theorized then peer-reviewed for faults in the design or in the conclusions, and finally, when some interim theory has indeed demonstrated itself many MANY times, repetitively, by independent researchers, we go on to see if it can indeed PREDICT future observations.
(And btw, we also know that, historically, the religious do not want to question anything! From your post, I'm sure you agree on this: just read it in the bible, or listen to your priest/minister/pastor, etc., and go home happy and satisfied after Sunday church, that its all gotta be true!
.............................................Do Not Ask any Questions!
[PS: that's exactly what my youth minister said to me when I started asking just a few miserably simple questions at age 17 or 18, when I was a devout Christian. He called me "impertinent!!" I guess in his eyes I was, wanting those answers and such quietly and competently answered... )) Anyhow, by his impertinence and lack of any good responses, he hastened my righteous departure from the sham of Christianity. Thank You God!
When the SM's proven hypothesis = theory = law process does that, reliably and repeatedly, why by golly, we do indeed start to "assume" () it to be pretty much accurate and somewhat useful as a probable LAW unto itself. At least as far as it's general utility and proven validity goes.
Else we'd still be attaching leeches to you when you get some vicious bacterial infection. or we'd go kill a chicken to read it's sprawled-out entrails, or we'd sacrifice a virgin by tossing her into a raging volcano. All quite reliable compared to us Ă¼ber-wacky scientists, I'll grant you that ().
Your thinking & state of mind is truly commendable ProC!
(NOTE: as for Hypotheses eventually turning into Laws, Please See: gravity, nuclear fusion and fission, manned supersonic flight, successful first-time rocket launches via hypothesized escape velocity calculations, the successful orbiting of satellites & space stations (which do not fall from the heavens...) our successful lunar & Mars Rover landings, etc . NOTE ALSO: Those satellites have duly noted & videotaped (gol-drat it all, huh?) that the earth IS round/spheroid, not FLAT!
Oh, and Evolution as well. Let's not forget the recent DNA proofs of Evolution either, which I'm sure you've read up on, eh?
All of these things proven beyond any RATIONAL doubt. By the simple application of persistent and step-by-step research and testing.
Now, if you are irrational, it's a obviously different story to be sure... )
So... tell me, oh special one; why would you NOT accept such results as reliable and factual at that point, ProC? Even just a few of them? Why reject them ALL? Why do you assume that we scientists have claimed we know it all when we so clearly do not? Fact is, by our very personalities and higher-ed training and professional career experiences, we do indeed actually LIKE a good problem and it's solutions?
So again; exactly why do you make such obviously false and combative commentaries? Is it that you simply DON'T LIKE what we have continuously proven in the past few decades to be inarguably factual? I'm guessing that is it, and you then reliably behave in a very immature, defensive and evasive manner.
"Defend the bible, not matter how absurd it is..."
I can only imagine the state of the world if you guys had it all your way and could shut up us more modern and open-minded thinkers out here (Often known as SCIENTISTS... ) Of course that was the way of this religion-dominated theocratic world for several of the past few centuries, with public tortures, burning at the stake, socio-cultural excommunications and public be-headings (no, sorry; that's still going on today in modern Islam. My mistake...).
But we've moved on now, and are rapidly gaining advanced knowledge[Oh NO!!!] on so many once-impossibly complex ideas because of new breakthroughs in scientific methodologies, the ever-more sophisticated tools of our trade, and our relentless exploration of subjects you'd rather we NEVER LOOK INTO… Plus let's not forget our keen and critically-thinking mindsets that you do not seem to share...
And noting as well that the SM requires us to document all the methods & materials used so that anyone can (but Christians always refuse to ever follow up on... ) easily repeat those telling experiments yourselves. And thus theoretically prove us so terribly wrong.
Or.... [Oooh- ohh, huh?] that could prove us to be ABSOLUTELY RIGHT...
Well OK: please do keep it up, ProC. It's a valuable demonstration to those who might be "on the edge" of converting to open-mindedness by reading the mental "sluice" you guys love to drool out here~!
Q: what does "siriusly" mean? Are you referring to the star Sirius perhaps?
Anyhow, what total loud-mouthed & unsupportable bunko! Nope, that's not what we professionals think AT ALL! EVER. Where did you get such a totally nutzo idea from? Or are you just being insulting and hostile because that's all yah got? I suspect so!
We scientists know that curious and unproven things first need to be hypothesized, then tested, then theorized then peer-reviewed for faults in the design or in the conclusions, and finally, when some interim theory has indeed demonstrated itself many MANY times, repetitively, by independent researchers, we go on to see if it can indeed PREDICT future observations.
(And btw, we also know that, historically, the religious do not want to question anything! From your post, I'm sure you agree on this: just read it in the bible, or listen to your priest/minister/pastor, etc., and go home happy and satisfied after Sunday church, that its all gotta be true!
.............................................Do Not Ask any Questions!
[PS: that's exactly what my youth minister said to me when I started asking just a few miserably simple questions at age 17 or 18, when I was a devout Christian. He called me "impertinent!!" I guess in his eyes I was, wanting those answers and such quietly and competently answered... )) Anyhow, by his impertinence and lack of any good responses, he hastened my righteous departure from the sham of Christianity. Thank You God!
When the SM's proven hypothesis = theory = law process does that, reliably and repeatedly, why by golly, we do indeed start to "assume" () it to be pretty much accurate and somewhat useful as a probable LAW unto itself. At least as far as it's general utility and proven validity goes.
Else we'd still be attaching leeches to you when you get some vicious bacterial infection. or we'd go kill a chicken to read it's sprawled-out entrails, or we'd sacrifice a virgin by tossing her into a raging volcano. All quite reliable compared to us Ă¼ber-wacky scientists, I'll grant you that ().
Your thinking & state of mind is truly commendable ProC!
(NOTE: as for Hypotheses eventually turning into Laws, Please See: gravity, nuclear fusion and fission, manned supersonic flight, successful first-time rocket launches via hypothesized escape velocity calculations, the successful orbiting of satellites & space stations (which do not fall from the heavens...) our successful lunar & Mars Rover landings, etc . NOTE ALSO: Those satellites have duly noted & videotaped (gol-drat it all, huh?) that the earth IS round/spheroid, not FLAT!
Oh, and Evolution as well. Let's not forget the recent DNA proofs of Evolution either, which I'm sure you've read up on, eh?
All of these things proven beyond any RATIONAL doubt. By the simple application of persistent and step-by-step research and testing.
Now, if you are irrational, it's a obviously different story to be sure... )
So... tell me, oh special one; why would you NOT accept such results as reliable and factual at that point, ProC? Even just a few of them? Why reject them ALL? Why do you assume that we scientists have claimed we know it all when we so clearly do not? Fact is, by our very personalities and higher-ed training and professional career experiences, we do indeed actually LIKE a good problem and it's solutions?
So again; exactly why do you make such obviously false and combative commentaries? Is it that you simply DON'T LIKE what we have continuously proven in the past few decades to be inarguably factual? I'm guessing that is it, and you then reliably behave in a very immature, defensive and evasive manner.
"Defend the bible, not matter how absurd it is..."
I can only imagine the state of the world if you guys had it all your way and could shut up us more modern and open-minded thinkers out here (Often known as SCIENTISTS... ) Of course that was the way of this religion-dominated theocratic world for several of the past few centuries, with public tortures, burning at the stake, socio-cultural excommunications and public be-headings (no, sorry; that's still going on today in modern Islam. My mistake...).
But we've moved on now, and are rapidly gaining advanced knowledge[Oh NO!!!] on so many once-impossibly complex ideas because of new breakthroughs in scientific methodologies, the ever-more sophisticated tools of our trade, and our relentless exploration of subjects you'd rather we NEVER LOOK INTO… Plus let's not forget our keen and critically-thinking mindsets that you do not seem to share...
And noting as well that the SM requires us to document all the methods & materials used so that anyone can (but Christians always refuse to ever follow up on... ) easily repeat those telling experiments yourselves. And thus theoretically prove us so terribly wrong.
Or.... [Oooh- ohh, huh?] that could prove us to be ABSOLUTELY RIGHT...
Well OK: please do keep it up, ProC. It's a valuable demonstration to those who might be "on the edge" of converting to open-mindedness by reading the mental "sluice" you guys love to drool out here~!
Free will is free will. That means man decided what they will do, whether to be with God or not. So, God did not know what men would do, because it was men's choice to make. With that said, the only way you will understand what I'm saying is to change your mind about how the future works. The future is not set when it comes to our choices. Whatever choice we make, the future of that choice will become the reality. God knows the end to all our choices, He knows the future of them all.(By this I mean whatever choice you make or don't make, God knows the future of both of them. The choice you make, will be the future that becomes reality.) Yet the choice itself, is all ours to make. You decide which future happens.
So get it out of your mind that before we existed, our choices were somehow set to disobey. The Bible clearly speaks that had God known what we "would" do, He would have not created us.
That makes your god not omniscient (all knowing)
Quote:
Wrong, He didn't know because there was nothing to know. Get it out of your head that the future is somehow set, that all of our choices that we make, were predestined to happen. That is not true, in fact, it is impossible and illogical.
Yes they are "predestined" but not in a biblical sense and it is very logical.
Quote:
What if God decided not to create us? Let's say I never existed at all. Yet because (for instance) this conversation on this forum was predestined, even if I never existed, I would still be having this conversation with you. So no, our choices are not pre-set.
When you start using what ifs and lets says, the typical theist fallacy, you have entered the realm of lets pretend and that is an argument of a 6 year old.
If you never existed you would have never existed. You would be unawares of anything in the universe. You would not own a PC and you would not be on the internet. Something that does not exist, like your god, cannot create/register an internet account which for someone that allegedly instapoofed the universe and all that there is into existence should be a no brainer.
Quote:
Of course, God's plan for our lives are laid out.
Theistly speaking, then you have no free will. That is the biblical definition of predestination.
Quote:
Yet, do we have to accept God's plan for our lives? According to free will, no, we don't have to follow God's plan. Now read Isaiah 46:10.....
Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';
Predestination, That means atheists are what they are b/c he predestined that to happen.
Quote:
You see, God declares the end, "from the beginning". If there is no beginning (IE what man decided to do in the Garden), there would be no future to determine. In other words, if man was never created, the choice of obedience or disobedience is not made, and thus there is no future to determine. Read in Genesis 6 how God regretted created man, because man "chose" to not return to Him, even after seeing the suffering sin has brought. If He known what men "would" do, He would have not created us. Yet that is not a slight on His omniscience, because I've shown how there was nothing to know before our existence.
It is a slight on his omniscience, logically he could have done an instazap and poofed man2.0 and problem solved. You know the designer argument you lot like to use, a motor manufacturer will do a global recall on a product if it is found to be faulty or at minimum provide a free fix to owners. (Without a designer having to fall on his samurai for an error in design or lopping his sons head off as an appeasement to all the car owners)
Quote:
The point actually is having free choice from what you are given.
That is not free choice or free will. It is the illusion of free choice or free will. Choices are still influenced by factors outside your direct influence.
Quote:
For example, God gave us the freedom to be with Him or go and try to make our own way. Adam chose the latter. So that is what I mean by free will.
That is not free will. It is a set up. w/o the ToK, there would have been no fall or sin and we would all be as dumb as nails. (Which seems to be the theist preference. Knowledge is a threat to theism)
Quote:
I'm not saying we have the free will, that if we wanted to jump and fly through the air, we can do so.
I can, but I would use a hang glider or para-sail
Quote:
Yet given the circumstances, you have the freedom to choose how to deal with it, what route you want to take solving the circumstance, etc.
And all of those circumstances are outside of your control. You can only make determinations within the environment you find yourself in. You are not a free agent.
Quote:
When it comes to where we want to spend eternity, we can choose to be with God or not. That is the choice we have to make.
Eternity does not exist. You fail in logic as you assume a conclusion then attempt to find facts to support that.
I guess you are between the lines suggesting Pascal's wager? Just in case - huh?
Quote:
The very fact that we died, shows we were seperated from God. When Adam died, he didn't go to Heaven, he actually went to a seperate compartment in Hell, waiting for Jesus to come and redeem him. So Adam was in fact seperated from God the moment he ate. Today, Adam is in Heaven, because of Jesus. Adam is now reconciled to God.
That is a hell of a lot of assertions w/o proof.
Adam - myth
Hell - myth
Jesus - myth
Heaven - myth
God - myth
You have failed to prove that any of these exist. Your Tinkerbell biblical texts are no authority as they are not even original
Quote:
So everything adds up. God speaking to Adam and his children afterward, is simply His grace on us. We didn't deserve any kind of relationship, but He gave it to us because of His love for us. Already telling Adam and Eve that Jesus would crush the seed of the serpent from the moment of their sin.
Yeah I suppose if you subscribe to cognitive dissonance anything is plausible. I on the other hand choose to live in the real world where everything has an explanation.
BTW relationships only exist between real entities like living people and perhaps their pets. Relationships with invisible friends, well that is a mental condition that you can get help for if you really want it.
Wrong, He didn't know because there was nothing to know. Get it out of your head that the future is somehow set, that all of our choices that we make, were predestined to happen. That is not true, in fact, it is impossible and illogical.
How do you know? Where are you getting your information from? Please provide specific references. I don't think I recall ever seeing anything like that in the Bible. Impossible you say?
"Who can know the mind of God?" Evidently the Bible was wrong, as it appears you must be the exception.
Quote:
Let's say I never existed at all. Yet because (for instance) this conversation on this forum was predestined, even if I never existed, I would still be having this conversation with you. So no, our choices are not pre-set..
So, God did not know what men would do, because it was men's choice to make.
So your god is not omnipotent after all?
Quote:
So get it out of your mind that before we existed, our choices were somehow set to disobey. The Bible clearly speaks that had God known what we "would" do, He would have not created us.
So despite having no evidence whatsoever that there even IS a god, Lantern for the last few hours has been able to tell us pretty much how it thinks, what it knew or did not know at any given time, how it planned and did everything and more.
He clearly has access to fountains of information that are somehow mysteriously precluded from any of us. Either that or... shock horror.... he is just making all this stuff up.
To fully know something is to know by experience. The All knowing would not have anything to do with knowing by experience .. unless we are simply living out an idea on a tape and have always existed which is very possible...and for some unknown reason jump in like fish looking for a good spot to show off...
But if God is all knowing, then he knew he would create humans and give them the choice which includes making the wrong choice, which in turn means the humans would not be perfect, and he would have known they would indeed make the wrong choice. If you're going to separate free will and the outcome of free will because God didn't know since people didn't exist before they were created, then you're pretty much limiting God's ability, which suggests God is not all knowing and leaves things all to chance. If God didn't know beforehand, then you're implying that he is also imperfect.
After all, the text says, "Let us make man in our image." Either God's image is that of perfection and all knowing, or he is imperfect because, as you said, he didn't know beforehand. How do you know that? That doesn't make much sense, considering He seems able to determine future events. If you're going to set the standard of ultimate perfection to your scenario, then you can't have it both ways. What boils down to is that you're saying you think you know what God knows. But the Bible says, "Who can know the mind of God?" In other words, you can't know because of Adam's fall from perfection.
----------
Wrong, He didn't know because there was nothing to know. Get it out of your head that the future is somehow set, that all of our choices that we make, were predestined to happen. That is not true, in fact, it is impossible and illogical. What if God decided not to create us? Let's say I never existed at all. Yet because (for instance) this conversation on this forum was predestined, even if I never existed, I would still be having this conversation with you. So no, our choices are not pre-set.
----------- Yes they are "predestined" but not in a biblical sense and it is very logical.
---------- Interesting. Because the reading in last Sunday's Mass made me reread what Jesus said. If I remember right, He was talking about Judas. He was saying when He arrived on earth, everyone was saved except for the one (judas, obviously) who was predestined to fall to fulfill the prophecy. I believe this was a reading from Acts or Corinthians.
He clearly has access to fountains of information that are somehow mysteriously precluded from any of us. Either that or... shock horror.... he is just making all this stuff up.
No!?!?!?!?!
Should we send him one of these....?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)) Anyhow, by his impertinence and lack of any good responses, he hastened my righteous departure from the sham of Christianity. Thank You God!
) it to be pretty much accurate and somewhat useful as a probable LAW unto itself. At least as far as it's general utility and proven validity goes.
). 
)
) Of course that was the way of this religion-dominated theocratic world for several of the past few centuries, with public tortures, burning at the stake, socio-cultural excommunications and public be-headings (no, sorry; that's still going on today in modern Islam. My mistake...).
) easily repeat those telling experiments yourselves. And thus theoretically prove us so terribly wrong. 
