thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) It is possible to hypothesize a designer without attribution to any one God. Sure. But for any hypothesis to become a theory it needs to be testable to destruction/falsifiable. So far there have not been any tests for a designer that have been able to withstand the testing process.SEE http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Falsifiability.html Edited September 4, 2014 by thesometimesaint
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 An atheist told me if they meet God they'll tell Him that He didn't do a good enough job to convince him that He existed while on earth.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 An atheist told me if they meet God they'll tell Him that He didn't do a good enough job to convince him that He existed while on earth. It is not God's job to prove himself but rather our job to choose him or not.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 4, 2014 Author Posted September 4, 2014 I agree, but good luck convincing an atheist that. They can be frustratingly stubborn.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Sure. But for any hypothesis to become a theory it needs to be testable to destruction/falsifiable. So far there have not been any tests for a designer that have been able to withstand the testing process.SEE http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Falsifiability.html That may be but I don't see much effort in that direction. I mostly see rejection, dismissal and ridicule. Can't make much headway that way.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I agree, but good luck convincing an atheist that. They can be frustratingly stubborn. Not my job to convince them, only to tell them. The choice is theirs. Old adage: A man convinced against his will is unconvinced still.
california boy Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Who is this God that mankind believes in? Is it the gods of the Greeks and Romans who believed they had a personal connection to numerous gods? Is it the Jewish God who commanded "his people" to murder every man woman and child of certain regions? Is it the God of the millions of Hindus? Or perhaps the God of the millions of follows of Mohamed? Maybe it is that god a small fractional religion of the Mormons. Some find it hard to believe in any god when there is no consensus of who that god actually is, what he does and what he wants us to do. How can you claim you know there is a god when those that make such a claim can not even begin to decide what or who god even is? Perhaps it is religion itself that puts off so many who study beliefs of others. It all begins to sound like the definition of who god is, is a supreme being who agrees with me on who should be in charge. 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 That may be but I don't see much effort in that direction. I mostly see rejection, dismissal and ridicule. Can't make much headway that way. It is futile effort. People are going to believe what they want to believe. We're not going to prove God or even a intelligent designer with the tools we have available. Maybe someday. But I don't expect that day to be any time soon. I'm fine with that, though I obviously do disagree with some of the claims made by Theists and Atheists alike. Whether it is right to mock belief claims or not it is just a fact of human nature that we all do it sometimes. We have come a long ways from burning Giordano Bruno at the stake for heresy. I have no desire to kick God out of my life, but by the same token I can't posit him into science either.
Rodeo Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I have no problem with God or with science. In a secular society such as is ours which "Holy Word of God are we to use? Let's use only the JKV that excludes the Catholics. How about the Koran that excludes all Christians. How about the Bhagavad Gita? Its followed by over a billion Hindus. As long as there are tests of knowledge in public schools there will be prayer. What the state can not do is force you to pray to a particular deity. Believe me the state has no interest in what you learn beyond that which will allow you to not be dependent on the state. Access to knowledge is not the same thing as knowing it. IE; The Knowledge Explosion SEE http://www.apastyle.org/manual/related/adair-2003.pdf The state does concern itself with what we learn. Try teaching anything that mentions "god" and you will be shut down.
Rodeo Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Sure. But for any hypothesis to become a theory it needs to be testable to destruction/falsifiable. So far there have not been any tests for a designer that have been able to withstand the testing process. SEE http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Falsifiability.html What is forensic science then? Are they not schooled in how to detect design in a murder?
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 The state does concern itself with what we learn. Try teaching anything that mentions "god" and you will be shut down. Nonsense. I learned about the Gods of the ancient Greeks, Romans, Indians(Asiatic and American), the polytheistic animal worshipers, and even the God's of Christians, Jews. and Muslims in public schools. I even was forced to listen to KJV only Baptists reading of their Bible at the start of every school day. First Period class was a science class, so it made for quite a show. I have no problem with teaching the Bible as literature, along with the other creation myths out there.
Ahab Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 An atheist told me if they meet God they'll tell Him that He didn't do a good enough job to convince him that He existed while on earth.It's actually going to go something like this:When we see God we're going to remember what this "test" was all about along with everything we knew before we came here (in other words no more veil separating us from those memories) and we're also going to remember how well (or how poorly) we did. And those so-called "atheists" are then going to see how poorly they did while feeling, oh, shall we say, very embarrassed. 1
JLHPROF Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I have no problem with teaching the Bible as literature, along with the other creation myths out there. I have a big problem reducing the Bible to creation myth literature. And I don't that is in keeping with Mormonism. Joseph certainly never did that and the most Brigham did was to call the Genesis account a fairytale (allegory) of the real event.
thesometimesaint Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 What is forensic science then? Are they not schooled in how to detect design in a murder? The forensic science of murder that has a priori of human design.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I have no problem with teaching the Bible as literature, along with the other creation myths out there. Does that include the macro-evolution myth?
Brian 2.0 Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I think that is what I said. It is possible for different people to look at the same evidence and come to a different conclusion.You did say that. I was agreeing with you. Let's enjoy this moment in sun together. 2
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 You did say that. I was agreeing with you. Let's enjoy this moment in sun together. Certainly feels good on these tired old bones.
Brian 2.0 Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 @ Brian 2.0, I am okay with you disagree with me. You have every right to disagree with me and you did do it respectfully. My thing is this.My reply was not from any definition or from fallacy. I don't even know what 'fallacy' is. My reply was strickly from my believes and based only as a possible explaintion, not fact. This is why I used the wording 'prehaps',The other thing is that I am not a Scrotsman. I understand where you can get that impression giben some of my wording I use.Again, you are entitled to disagree with me and that is all good. I just wanted to clearify a few things. Thanks."No true Scotsman" is a nickname given to a certain type of argument that doesn't really work. No reflection on you personally! I didn't pick up from your wording or anything that you were Scottish. If you google the phrase you'll see what I'm talking about. I basically goes like this... "No true Scotsman would ever eat a hot dog.""My uncle is Scottish, lives in Scotland, and he eatshot dogs""Well... He's not TRUE Scotsman then"That's just kinda weak and should be avoided. I was saying your post was kind if like that. "The so-called well educated atheist are not as educated as well as one seems to think they are. If they were, they would be smart enough to believe in God. The fact they are atheist only shows their true level of immature inelegance."It's basically the same thing"No smart people are atheists""I know an atheist, and he's smart""Well... If he's atheist, he's not truly smart"Not a big deal... It's just a very blanket statement. And I didn't mean anything personal by it. I would just hope that you could meet and an atheist that you also would consider smart.
Paddy Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I am interested in the increased contribution of LDS academics and intellectuals to church history, doctrine, and faith issues. It seems to me that the church has had to balance its relationship with its intellectuals over its history and they are now coming to the fore again. It will be how the church uses its intellectuals over the next few decades that will assist the church in solidifying the faith of the members. A great example is the recent release of the essays - a fantastic contribution.
ERayR Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 I want a cool breeze instead myself. They are on the way. By January you will be wishing for days in the sun>
Calm Posted September 4, 2014 Posted September 4, 2014 Not really...maybe February, but not January...I like the dark. I actually cheer up and get more active when the sun goes down, have since i was able to stay up past 7PM. Just my metabolism I guess. It is the dreary that gets to me which shows up usually sometime in February with little piles of dirty snow for days with no chane.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 5, 2014 Author Posted September 5, 2014 I sleep better when it's cold. I can't sleep in the hot weather. 1
Calm Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 My neighbour laughs at me when I have my fan blowing into my bedroom in January when it's below freezing outside. I close it down if it ever gets below 50 though inside.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 5, 2014 Author Posted September 5, 2014 Ah yes, so much more comfortable to be cold and snugged in a blanket to fall asleep. We get humid summers in Boston which means it's still sticky and hot at nights.
Recommended Posts