Kylie's Pool Challenge, Mark II

[Speedwell]

There are no contradictions. If you’ve actually done your own research, you’d know that.

There are, but I disagree with Kylie. I think that the contradictions are entirely consistent with them being descriptions of real events. Complete consistency of second and third hand accounts smacks of funny business.

 

[Allandavid]

There are, but I disagree with Kylie. I think that the contradictions are entirely consistent with them being descriptions of real events. Complete consistency of second and third hand accounts smacks of funny business.

Aren’t these descriptions supposedly inspired by a perfect god?

 

[Hammster]

You went further than that....

I don’t believe so.

 

[Speedwell]

Aren’t these descriptions supposedly inspired by a perfect god?

Yes, but what is meant by "inspired" can vary among Christians.

 

[Allandavid]

I don’t believe so.

Of course not...

 

[Allandavid]

Yes, but what is meant by "inspired" can vary among Christians.

Yup...

 

[Speedwell]

Yup...

In any case, if you believe the author of II Timothy that the scriptures were divinely inspired in some sense, it appears that he was referring to the Tanakh. Which, if any of the Gospels were meant to be included is unclear.

 

[Leaf473]

Well in procreation -- A human begins as a zygote - not viable in the wild.
Suppose the Bible said God created Adam on day 1 of Adam's life as a zygote and left him there in the dirt -- there would be no day-2 for Adam. So instead God created Adam as a fully capable adult...

but then the atheist evolutionist says "oh no wait! That would be God lying ... making it appear that Adam is 25 when in fact he is only 1 day old".

yes, I think I agree with what you're saying.

if God created Adam middle-aged (or, as I like to think, as a teenager),
no reason why he couldn't have made the universe "middle-aged".

would that be a lie?
well, any miracle will produce a kind of apparent false past.

a similar example to Adam's creation is Jesus turning water into wine.
the apparent past of the wine was then different from its actual past.

 

[Speedwell]

yes, I think I agree with what you're saying.

if God created Adam middle-aged (or, as I like to think, as a teenager),
no reason why he couldn't have made the universe "middle-aged".

would that be a lie?
well, any miracle will produce a kind of apparent false past.

a similar example to Adam's creation is Jesus turning water into wine.
the apparent past of the wine was then different from its actual past.

The question is, what would be the point? Did he do it just to "save" a literal interpretation of Genesis favored by modern Evangelicals?

 

[AV1611VET]

You have completely missed the point.

Where have I hear that before?

 

[Leaf473]

Given that the position of the balls is essentially random after they have been broken (assuming that they were hit with sufficient speed), just about any position could be considered. To run a computer simulation of such a position to see if it could have come from a break would have so many variables that it's essentially impossible to calculate.

You are correct in that if there is no way to tell, either possibility should be considered. Hence, with no way to tell from the note, the best way to tell would be to investigate the reality - the table and balls themselves. This is analogous to us studying the universe to see what we can learn. Unfortunately, we have the equivalent of some people who insist that any study of the table and the balls themselves leads to the wrong conclusions and the text is right no matter what.

well, as a side note, I think the position of pool balls after a break is chaotic, not random (if I understand those two terms correctly).

I agree that it's virtually impossible to determine whether pool balls on a table are the result of a break or placement, in most cases.
probably similar to the three-body problem in calculating orbits?

yes, some people do not wish the universe to be studied.
this is unfortunate.

suppose that the document does not actually state that the robotic arms placed the balls in such a way that they would leave traces on the felt of the table top.
however, it does say that the arms are sophisticated enough to have done that.

then, even careful examination of the pool table felt would not be conclusive.

that having been said, I'm very much in favor of studying the universe using the scientific method.
it's a great way to learn the apparent past of the universe!

 

[AV1611VET]

Okay, everyone, here's my input on this matter that has gotten outta hand.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

This "hold the truth in unrighteousness" has a dual meaning here.

The idea, in the second sense, is that someone "holds back" the truth in unrighteousness.

Remember how I'm fond of saying science can create mental blocks that people can't get around?

That's what's happening.

In the case of evolution vs creation, the "truth" is creation.

But some "hold that truth back" because they believe in something that is unrighteous (i.e., evolution).

So to say someone is "holding the truth in unrighteousness" is, in a sense, saying they are preventing the truth of the Scriptures from taking root in their mind because they believe in something that suppresses that truth.

 

[Speedwell]

Okay, everyone, here's my input on this matter that has gotten outta hand.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

This "hold the truth in unrighteousness" has a dual meaning here.

The idea, in the second sense, is that someone "holds back" the truth in unrighteousness.

Remember how I'm fond of saying science can create mental blocks that people can't get around?

That's what's happening.

In the case of evolution vs creation, the "truth" is creation.

But some "hold that truth back" because they believe in something that is unrighteous (i.e., evolution).

So to say someone is "holding the truth in unrighteousness" is, in a sense, saying they are preventing the truth of the Scriptures from taking root in their mind because they believe in something that suppresses that truth.

And, of course, you define what the "truth of the Scriptures" is. How convenient.

 

[AV1611VET]

suppose that the document does not actually state that the robotic arms placed the balls in such a way that they would leave traces on the felt of the table top.
however, it does say that the arms are sophisticated enough to have done that.

I think the big question in the OP is:

Does the document that was left on the pool table break the tie or not?

One person says the balls were placed there (design), while another person says the balls came to rest there as a result of a break (chaos).

Alfred prefers to use the document to "break the tie" and believe the balls were placed there by hand.

 

[AV1611VET]

And, of course, you define what the "truth of the Scriptures" is. How convenient.

Then you define it.

And after you've done that, give me an example of "holding the truth in unrighteousness."

 

[BobRyan]

yes, I think I agree with what you're saying.

if God created Adam middle-aged (or, as I like to think, as a teenager),
no reason why he couldn't have made the universe "middle-aged".

would that be a lie?
well, any miracle will produce a kind of apparent false past.

a similar example to Adam's creation is Jesus turning water into wine.
the apparent past of the wine was then different from its actual past.

True - the miracle is to benefit someone - but by the very definition of being a miracle it presents a present reality that was not arrived at simply by "grass growing longer over time just-so" or the "sun shining for 500 years just-so". Any more than creating a painting is the result of plants wilting "just so".

evolutionism has a ton of "just-so" chance encounter stories to try to hobble its way up mount-improbable in an effort to imagine an outcome that is the same as if someone showed up and "just did it all to start with".

 

[BobRyan]

I think the big question in the OP is:

Does the document that was left on the pool table break the tie or not?

One person says the balls were placed there (design), while another person says the balls came to rest there as a result of a break (chaos).

Alfred prefers to use the document to "break the tie" and believe the balls were placed there by hand.

Yes that's the basics of the story - but the scenario is flawed in that it does not reflect the reality of the current debate in its most basic character.

hence... an update to that OP scenario -- allowing a bit more of the real world into it -- Sunday at 8:41 AM #8

I point out that Darwin tries that same oversimplification with his "protoplasm" simplistic view of the cell as one single blob of jello 'protoplasm' -- all the complexities of that reality missing so as to make it "seem" more reasonable to find one pop out of the primordial stew on its own and since nothing complex is there -- then nothing complex needed to go to the next stage either. Which ignores the very core of the problem to start with.

 

[Speedwell]

Then you define it.

And after you've done that, give me an example of "holding the truth in unrighteousness."

The only truth of scripture is our salvation in Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

The only truth of scripture is our salvation in Christ.

Not how Christ describes it in Mark 7.
Not how John describes it in John 1 where the creation event is foundational to his gospel
Not how the Bible starts out -- for it too starts the reader off with the creation fact.

Nothing in the Bible says "this is all a lie except somehow... and for some unknown reason... God the Son died for your sins... forget the rest"... as I am sure we all know.

But that IS the sort of evangelism that yields diminishing results over time.
The kind of decline mentioned here - Tuesday at 9:52 PM #149
by outside observers

 

[BobRyan]

In any case, if you believe the author of II Timothy that the scriptures were divinely inspired in some sense, it appears that he was referring to the Tanakh. Which, if any of the Gospels were meant to be included is unclear.

the very texts you claim are the most to be distrusted??