A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2012, 01:06 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 12:51 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  If you mock me, I will assume you are not interested in a civil debate and I so I won't respond to you. If you are respectful and civil, I will try my best to answer, but I just ask that you don't pile on.

You lasted a fairly long time compared to the average, to give you your due. Theists are always so damn prickly though. And they almost never learn to laugh at themselves...

PS we'll respect you if you show yourself worthy. You're in the Lions' Den, did you forget? Got a good tight grip on your Bible? Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
22-08-2012, 01:09 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 09:40 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 09:28 AM)DLJ Wrote:  In light of which, it is very easy to see where the Quran stole its morality.

Forcing submission isn't what Peter is saying here.

Submission to the husband would be done in joy because the husband understands, cares for, and loves his wife. He wants her to be happy and joyful and all she wants and needs. The husband gives love and understanding in return of respect and submission.

Husbands and wives acting Christ-like have done this for centuries.

You must know nothing of ancient history. Matriarchy too was wide spread. One example is Minoan Crete.

I find the idea of submission disgusting. Women are our equals and the idea of one sex leading the other is an archaic way of thinking.

Its time to flush that idea. Human beings no longer need to act like this.

Also people having done anything for a long period of time does not make it correct.

See an Appeal to tradition

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like fstratzero's post
22-08-2012, 01:13 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(21-08-2012 10:53 PM)LadyJane Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 10:43 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Science simply cannot explain everything.

Cannot, or has not yet? Do you understand what science means? It is not absolute (which is not a bad thing).


Please forgive me if I'm wrong and missed it, but 10 default pages of replies after this post, I have not seen an answer to my question "why must there be?". It looks like several people want to know, too. Are you open to the possibility that your conclusion of 'must be' may not be the truth? Don't you simply want the truth (whether that is for or against your Christian belief? For me, having walked similar shoes as you, I was sick of fighting and just wanted to discover the truth. Shouldn't we all?)

No, the apology is mine. It's hard to keep up with all the questions so I must have just glanced over your post.

Science cannot explain everything as it only one means of discovering truth. The other is through the use of philosophy. Things like justice and injustice, morals, the nature of reality, the existence of God are all dealt with in the philosophical realm. I'm very enthusiastic for scientific advance and discovery. I simply realize it's not the end all be all. There must be something outside of this universe (not in the spatial sense of the word) that caused the universe to come into existence. At one time, there was absolutely nothing, and then there was something. I don't have enough "faith" to believe that something came from nothing. Something caused something. Something outside of the physical realm.
Why outside of the physical realm? Because the physical realm could not have caused itself. It did not exist and so it could not have caused anything. Therefore the source of the universe came outside of the physical realm. What caused that which caused the universe? I think the best theory is that an uncaused being caused the universe, because I find infinite regress to be unsatisfactory.

To use a popular apologetic example, if we a find shoe print in the sand, the theist would say "someone wearing a shoe caused that." The naturalistic atheist responds, "Oh yeah, well who made the shoe?" While it may be a valid point of discussion sometime later on, it doesn't take away from the fact that SOMETHING must have cause that print to occur.

I hope that has helped clarify some of my reasoning, unfortunately these discussions don't get to flourish in real-time, face-to-face discussion. Thanks for the welcome, I guess folks here have taken an interest in this religious oddity lol.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:13 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:09 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  You must know nothing of ancient history. Matriarchy too was wide spread. One example is Minoan Crete.

I find the idea of submission disgusting. Women are our equals and the idea of one sex leading the other is an archaic way of thinking.

Its time to flush that idea. Human beings no longer need to act like this.

If they want to, it's OK. Some people like being less dominant. But it's when it's made into a virtue and used to keep people down, to take away their own freedom... that's when it's crap. Religious submission is pure unadulterated bullshit IMO.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
22-08-2012, 01:14 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
Also I changed my avatar to illustrate the point that I need an equally ridiculous tool to cut through all this crusted hardened poo. Its an orange transparent chainsaw!!

The theological walls in your minds will succumb to the orange transparent chainsaw.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like fstratzero's post
22-08-2012, 01:18 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(21-08-2012 10:54 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Actually, the Big Bang is completely scientifically deniable. Astronomers and Cosmologists are looking at new evidence all the time. There's even an article floating around here about Aussie scientists researching the possibility of a cold crystallization of matter rather than an explosion. Then how do you reconcile your apologetics to explain the whole let there be light thing?

I would be interested in reading some of those new theories. As for reconciling with the "let there be light thing," I understand Genesis to be figurative in much of its language. While there are some things I am very certain on, I am not naive enough to think the origins of the earth are not still somewhat shrouded in mystery. The purpose of Genesis was primarily to communicate that God created the universe, and that there was a falling away of mankind from God. It's not a science book.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:21 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:18 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  
(21-08-2012 10:54 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Actually, the Big Bang is completely scientifically deniable. Astronomers and Cosmologists are looking at new evidence all the time. There's even an article floating around here about Aussie scientists researching the possibility of a cold crystallization of matter rather than an explosion. Then how do you reconcile your apologetics to explain the whole let there be light thing?

I would be interested in reading some of those new theories. As for reconciling with the "let there be light thing," I understand Genesis to be figurative in much of its language. While there are some things I am very certain on, I am not naive enough to think the origins of the earth are not still somewhat shrouded in mystery. The purpose of Genesis was primarily to communicate that God created the universe, and that there was a falling away of mankind from God. It's not a science book.

hey ! i've got a great idea .. let's close this intro thread and open new threads on individual topics you'd like to discuss TrueReason.. Smile

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ddrew's post
22-08-2012, 01:22 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:21 PM)ddrew Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 01:18 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  I would be interested in reading some of those new theories. As for reconciling with the "let there be light thing," I understand Genesis to be figurative in much of its language. While there are some things I am very certain on, I am not naive enough to think the origins of the earth are not still somewhat shrouded in mystery. The purpose of Genesis was primarily to communicate that God created the universe, and that there was a falling away of mankind from God. It's not a science book.

hey ! i've got a great idea .. let's close this intro thread and open new threads on individual topics you'd like to discuss TrueReason.. Smile

Was already discussed.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:24 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:22 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(22-08-2012 01:21 PM)ddrew Wrote:  hey ! i've got a great idea .. let's close this intro thread and open new threads on individual topics you'd like to discuss TrueReason.. Smile

Was already discussed.

well apparently TrueReason is not seeing the reason in it so needs to be repeated!

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -- Voltaire
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-08-2012, 01:25 PM
RE: A future Pastor and Christian Apologist
(22-08-2012 01:13 PM)TrueReason Wrote:  Science cannot explain everything as it only one means of discovering truth. The other is through the use of philosophy.

No, science is a search for truths about the natural world; life, the universe, etc.
Philosophy does not give us truth, it gives us reasoned opinions.

Quote:Things like justice and injustice, morals, the nature of reality, the existence of God are all dealt with in the philosophical realm. I'm very enthusiastic for scientific advance and discovery. I simply realize it's not the end all be all. There must be something outside of this universe (not in the spatial sense of the word) that caused the universe to come into existence.

That is an opinion, your opinion. There is nothing that says there must be something that caused the universe to come into existence; there is nothing to say the the universe 'came into existence'; it may always have existed. We don't know, you don't know.

Quote: At one time, there was absolutely nothing, and then there was something. I don't have enough "faith" to believe that something came from nothing. Something caused something. Something outside of the physical realm.

Again, your opinion and a philosophically unsound one. There is no evidence of there being anything "outside of the physical realm".

Quote: Why outside of the physical realm? Because the physical realm could not have caused itself. It did not exist and so it could not have caused anything. Therefore the source of the universe came outside of the physical realm. What caused that which caused the universe? I think the best theory is that an uncaused being caused the universe, because I find infinite regress to be unsatisfactory.

That is an ad hoc argument, special pleading. The universe itself could be uncaused.

Quote: To use a popular apologetic example, if we a find shoe print in the sand, the theist would say "someone wearing a shoe caused that." The naturalistic atheist responds, "Oh yeah, well who made the shoe?" While it may be a valid point of discussion sometime later on, it doesn't take away from the fact that SOMETHING must have cause that print to occur.

This is essentially Paley's argument from design. But a shoe print? Something that looks like a shoe print could come about by natural means.

Quote:I hope that has helped clarify some of my reasoning, unfortunately these discussions don't get to flourish in real-time, face-to-face discussion. Thanks for the welcome, I guess folks here have taken an interest in this religious oddity lol.

Have you read any real science books?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: