• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Origin of God's Morality.

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
That little?

Myth it is then.

I do not know what you mean by that capitonym. Does it equate with your "religious opinion"?

It is not my beliefs that are on the table.
Yeah, because you don't believe anything.
I don't. But I see no reason to reject it.
See what I mean? You don't believe anything.
I can't prove that the Earth orbits the Sun.

By "theory" are you implying a scientific explanation for the diversity of biology on this planet that includes a literal Adam and Eve and a global biblical flood? This I would like to see.
Science can't prove against Adam and Eve and a global flood. They cast doubts, but the evidence is dependent on the point of view of the viewer.
As per wiki:

Philosophers of science have suggested a number of criteria, including the Karl Popper's controversial falsifiability criterion, to help them differentiate scientific endeavors from a non-scientific ones. Validity, accuracy, and social mechanisms ensuring quality control, such as peer review and repeatability of findings, are amongst the most respected criteria in present-day global scientific community.
I don't go to science for religious belief. I don't go to religion for my knowledge of science.
Why not? That link you provided made a clear case for it.

You appear to.
Because I let religion be religion and science be science? I'll bet you don't go to the sports channel to get your political news...
So you are starting with your conclusion, and working back from there.

Yes, the salt. I guess not all of us are prepared to lower the evidential bar to such an extent. :)
If that was all it is, you might have a point. What about the fossil record in the Himalaya mountains and elsewhere?
Incompatible points of view.
No, points of view with different purposes.
How so? All you have done is to declare your view right, and others wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
You think so, in fact, lotsa Christians think so, which is why they reject the theory(s) of evolution. I don't think it's diametrically opposed or incompatible with biology.
It would seem that if you reject what I understand to be one of the most well-evidenced scientific theories regarding biology, that your beliefs are incompatible with biology as a whole.
You think so, I don't. Call it what you want. It ends the same. We disagree.
And those unresolved incompatibilities form part of the basis for why I do not accept your religious beliefs. What you believe about biology is still a mystery to me.
Is there anything on those pages that has not been addressed by plate tectonic theory, in the absence of a global flood?
Depends on what a day is...don't you think? If the account is allegorical, which many believe, it doesn't mean "24-hour time period. Besides for there to be a day, there has to be a sun and stars, oh wait, the Big Bang!
More obfuscation. ^_^
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
It would seem that if you reject what I understand to be one of the most well-evidenced scientific theories regarding biology, that your beliefs are incompatible with biology as a whole.
If it was simple a biology problem, you might be right. But it's not simply biology.
And those unresolved incompatibilities form part of the basis for why I do not accept your religious beliefs. What you believe about biology is still a mystery to me.
I believe biology, as a whole to be accurate for what it holds. I don't see any contradiction between any biology and Adam and Eve.
Is there anything on those pages that has not been addressed by plate tectonic theory, in the absence of a global flood?
I don't know if it's conclusive, or not, but I believe the Bible, thanks.
More obfuscation. ^_^
Call the Truth what you will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Poetry and prophecy. Your quote of Isaiah is one translation, but here's another:
For thus says the LORD,
The creator of the heavens,
who is God,
The designer and maker of the earth
who established it,
Not as an empty waste* did he create it,
but designing it to be lived in:
I am the LORD, and there is no other.
So this is wrong as well?
And yet, we know in our hearts that they're both true.
Who is this "we" that you speak for?
It may be that God gave a soul to Adam and Eve.
What is a "soul"?
But plate tectonics show that the earth was flatter than it is today, and could have been flooded. Geology, to some who believe in God, shows them that it's true.
Try stating this in the form of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, because you don't believe anything.See what I mean? You don't believe anything.
I do not have religious beliefs, if that is what you are attempting to say.
Science can't prove against Adam and Eve and a global flood. They cast doubts, but the evidence is dependent on the point of view of the viewer.
Can you present this evidence in the form of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis?
I don't go to science for religious belief. I don't go to religion for my knowledge of science.
Did your belief in a literal Adam and Eve and global biblical flood come before your search for evidence, or after?
Because I let religion be religion and science be science? I'll bet you don't go to the sports channel to get your political news...
df13514632911c2c64ca268ad65ac3de.jpg

If that was all it is, you might have a point. What about the fossil record in the Himalaya mountains and elsewhere?
Can you present this evidence in the form of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis?
No, points of view with different purposes.
Indeed. One perpetuating religious belief, the other exploring reality.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I do not have religious beliefs, if that is what you are attempting to say.
Apparently little belief in some of the most widely held scientific beliefs either.
Can you present this evidence in the form of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis?
Yes, I can. You go up into the Himalayan mountains, dig, and you find fossils of sea creatures.
Did your belief in a literal Adam and Eve and global biblical flood come before your search for evidence, or after?

df13514632911c2c64ca268ad65ac3de.jpg
My understanding changed. I was once a young earth creationist, but am no longer. I don't get my news from either of those, either.
Can you present this evidence in the form of a testable, falsifiable hypothesis?
See above.
Indeed. One perpetuating religious belief, the other exploring reality.
Exploring scientific belief is more like it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: civilwarbuff
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
No, they certainly do not. Those creation-science sites are all bogus. You would be wise to avoid them.
No, I wouldn't be wise to avoid them.
 
Upvote 0

Hoghead1

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2015
4,911
741
78
✟8,968.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You think so, in fact, lotsa Christians think so, which is why they reject the theory(s) of evolution. I don't think it's diametrically opposed or incompatible with biology.
You think so, I don't. Call it what you want. It ends the same. We disagree.http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm
https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/global/worldwide-flood-evidence/
Depends on what a day is...don't you think? If the account is allegorical, which many believe, it doesn't mean "24-hour time period. Besides for there to be a day, there has to be a sun and stars, oh wait, the Big Bang!
You are citing online sources that are largely creation-science sites, which are largely bogus science. If I were you, I'd chose sites that were solid science.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
If it was simple a biology problem, you might be right. But it's not simply biology.
Not if it has to work with your religion.
I believe biology, as a whole to be accurate for what it holds.
I understand that it holds that we share a common ancestor with all other living things on this planet, in a manner that is incompatible with the concept of humans being descended from only a few, or a pair, or individuals.
I don't see any contradiction between any biology and Adam and Eve.
I will grant you that, if your understanding of biology is comparable to your understanding of cosmology, and the concept of falsifiability.;)
I don't know if it's conclusive, or not, but
...but you reject it out of hand, I know. If you ever do come up with something that has not been addressed by plate tectonic theory, in the absence of a global flood, be sure to post it here. Or, in the Physical and Life Sciences forum.:)
I believe the Bible, thanks.
So do the Christian atheists and Christian pantheists.

"Christian atheism is a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed."

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The apostle Paul quotes a pantheist poem about Zeus in Acts 17:28, turning it into a panentheist statement about their "unknown God" when he quotes, "'In him we live and move and have our being' as some of your poets have said."

Panentheism is also a feature of some later Christian thought, particularly in mystical Orthodox Christianity, Catholic philosophy, and process theology. In order to avoid confusion with pantheism some panentheists now use the doublet "unitheism.""


Panentheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Call the Truth what you will.
What do you mean by that capitonym? Is that short for 'religious opinion'?
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
It seems you had a formatting error in your post, which deleted half of it in the reply.
Read the Catechism. But since you won't,
Apostles Creed
I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in JesusChrist, His only Son, our Lord: Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, is seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy CatholicChurch, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting.
Nicene Creed
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.

Athanasian Creed
Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood by God. One altogether; not by confusion of Essence; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.
link
I know about the 'saving' bit.
But we're not compartmentalized, even by that definition.
Not yourself, from what I have seen. You toss out what does not reconcile.
If you want to understand what Christians believe, start by reading the Catechism, which is the basis for all Christian belief before the 1500's, and then work on The Protestant reformation.
No, it is far more interesting to see what individuals actually say they believe, in a venue such as this.
I questioned the Truth, and it was proven to my satisfaction.
I suppose the purpose of this forum is to see if you can prove it to the satisfaction of anyone that is not already a believer.
I think many scientists are wrong on AGW. Nutritionists are often wrong as to what is good for us and what is not. Meteorologists often don't get the weather right. There's plenty of times when they don't say they're wrong, but they are wrong.
and from that you extrapolate to the [alleged] weakness of evolutionary theory? Does it stop there? Do you also doubt atomic theory? Germ theory? Semiconductor theory?
So that tells you that it's totally false?
Funny, coming from the guy that uses meteorology as a guide stick for evaluating scientific theory.

I do not think it is totally false. However, even if I were to grant that the bible contained accurate archeological references, and historical stories that - in part - correlate with external references, if the key events remain myth, and unsubstantiated (the resurrection, etc), and the concept of "God" lacks a robust, testable falsifiable definition, I will remain unconvinced.
The very first verses of Genesis can be equated to the Big Bang. Who is to say it didn't happen that way, just that the time frame of 7 days is metaphorical?
I suppose that would be the job of the astrophysicists that study this stuff.
Were you there to say it's completely false?
I love this one. You'll use it on scientific explanations, but exempt your own beliefs from it. ^_^
Really? Sorry you have trouble with your eyes.
I'll read it if you can post it.
I never said God is of no significance.
You may not have done so intentionally, but you did. You said "God is an absolute, he is the definition of unfalsifiable."
God is the author of science and of the universe.
Strange then that such a god would inspire religious adherents that are so anti-science, and be undetectable by that same science.
Where, in Hamlet, does Hamlet meet Shakespeare?
An apt analogy. To Hamlet, Shakespeare is non-existent. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
The problem for you is, God is in everything. As the Creator of all, he can't not be in something. Even when you try to remove him.

Claimed to be everywhere, never shown to be anywhere.

You seem desperate.

OK, but as the creator of it, He cannot be excluded, or not included

You keep making claims of this deity being the creator...
Any chance of supporting those claims?

Creator is not a role?

At this point, it's just a (faith based) claim.
Anytime you wish to support those claims..........


Too lazy to read, I see.

Yes, absolutely.
I'm not about to spend a few hours reading a whole website, guessing what your point is.

Please make your own point.
ps: aren't you aware of the forum rules regarding posting bare links?

Knowledge is in the head. Belief is in the heart.

The heart pumps blood.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Darwin had DNA at his disposal?

You didn't ask me what proof Darwin had at his disposal.
You asked what proof *I* have at my disposal.

But he wasn't talking just about the solar system, was he?

I actually don't know about that.
In any case, even a heliocentric universe is "more correct" then a geocentric universe.

You can't prove otherwise

I don't have a burden of proof of claims that I'm not making.

, and I can prove my age.

If the universe and everything it contains was actually created 5 seconds ago and made to look 13.7 billion years old, with all our memories implantend, then you can't.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
But plate tectonics show that the earth was flatter than it is today, and could have been flooded. Geology, to some who believe in God, shows them that it's true.

Apparantly, you are not aware that geology as a field, was born when a couple of christians said out to find evidence of the biblical flood. And subsequently failed.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Science can't prove against Adam and Eve and a global flood.

False. Science annihilates both claims as literal truths.
Both these claims make testable predictions.
If those predictions don't check out, then the claims are disproven / false / debunked / refuted / in error.

Guess what? The predictions don't check out.......


I don't go to religion for my knowledge of science.
Because I let religion be religion and science be science? I'll bet you don't go to the sports channel to get your political news...

And yet, you cite articles from answers in genesis, of all things...

What about the fossil record in the Himalaya mountains and elsewhere?

What about it?
 
Upvote 0