How come humans have not evolved into a higher species?

Cis.jd said:

No, back then people thought that the weather and various epidemics was caused because of supernatural reasons likewise they believed it could be pacified supernaturally, period.

Click to expand...

This is statement is totally unsupportable. There is nothing to it except you saying it.

Cis.jd said:

So why don't you believe that stuff anymore, especially as you said "science can't deal with the supernatural"?

Click to expand...

I have not stopped believing in the supernatural.

Cis.jd said:

Read about the Bubonic plague and other plagues that happened before.

Click to expand...

Yes, and how separating the sick as the Old Testament instructs people to, helped protect the healthy?
When outbreaks of disease we cannot cure occur now, I pray we will find a solution. That is what happened then. It has happened in my lifetime, read yourself, AIDS, late 1980s.

There are stories of people having spiritual visions during times of great tragedy, and seeing spiritual meaning in the details of what happens, in the past and present. Paranoid and judgemental ideas about "punishment from God" still happen, and people still also ask questions about God and us at such times.

Cis.jd said:

For your second argument, why call for medical help anyway, why can't prayer be good on it's own?

Click to expand...

This is irrelevant to your unsupported, and in my opinion, incorrect claims about people in the past compared to now, and the position of science.

Cis.jd said:

Your argument about it not fitting the purpose of philosophy is arguable and also depends on the circumstances.

Click to expand...

Yes it is arguable, it is a philosophical statement.

Cis.jd said:

I can say that religion with out science makes bad philosophy just based on the stuff i've seen here such as advices for women who to chose remaining being beaten by their husbands over "falling into sin" by divorcing him.

Click to expand...

This is nothing to do with science and its relationship to the spiritual. It is bad theology.

Cis.jd said:

How good would it be if Christianity still forced in flat earth, the sun revolving around the earth, all because of bible passages, etc to this day?

Click to expand...

I do not approve of forced religion. Force is the valid aspect of your point.

See " myth of the flat Earth" : Myth of the flat Earth - Wikipedia

Cis.jd said:

My stance is, I don't believe in a supernatural or a natural I think that they are all the same.

Click to expand...

Please clarify, do you believe God to be naturally existent?

Daniel Marsh said:

What is the skeptics bible?

Click to expand...

Maybe this ? Skeptic's Annotated Bible - RationalWiki

MrsFoundit said:

This is statement is totally unsupportable. There is nothing to it except you saying it.

Click to expand...

How is this unsupported? These are historical facts.
FOLK BELIEFS AND RITUALS ASSOCIATED WITH RAIN AND DROUGHT on JSTOR
https://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/pleins_textes_6/colloques2/010012378.pdf
Decameron Web | Plague

Here. Look at this Christian sect in asia.. "rebuking tornado's by calling on God".

I have not stopped believing in the supernatural.

Click to expand...

But in context with the question on point, do you believe a typical thunderstorm or random illnesses is all because "God is angry"?

Yes, and how separating the sick as the Old Testament instructs people to, helped protect the healthy? When outbreaks of disease we cannot cure occur now, I pray we will find a solution. That is what happened then. It has happened in my lifetime, read yourself, AIDS, late 1980s.
There are stories of people having spiritual visions during times of great tragedy, and seeing spiritual meaning in the details of what happens, in the past and present. Paranoid and judgemental ideas about "punishment from God" still happen, and people still also ask questions about God and us at such times.

Click to expand...

This is far out of context to what we are discussing. You are clearly making up stuff about what they did back then because it is factual that Christians accused Jews for causing the plague )which caused Pope Clement to issue a religious order to stop the violence) and other things such as profanity. They thought this plague was supernatural. Yet, you know now they are not so you know that any form of hardcore "repentance" is absolutely wrong even philosophical wise now all due to how science has shown how it happened and how it was stopped.

This is nothing to do with science and its relationship to the spiritual. It is bad theology.

Click to expand...

First of all, you said "philosophy". A lack and rejection of science opens the doors for bad theology, because the person is prone to preach things that are false and potentially harmful. All that resorts in the perversion of God's word by making it look like silly fiction to others.
Going back to the divorce advice given on here, this is already proof as to how bad philosophy can become with only religious views as it's driving force.

I do not approve of forced religion. Force is the valid aspect of your point.

Click to expand...

But the point of that was talking about how science contributes to our philosophy. Please reread it to so you can reply in context with the point of it.

Please clarify, do you believe God to be naturally existent?

Click to expand...

I don't believe there is a "supernatural" or a "natural", they are both the same. What we think of as "Natural" is just what we've managed to understand and identify comprehensibly.

Daniel Marsh said:

The "orbit of the earth" is not a circle.
Your interpretation does not fit the cosmetology of that time period of Egypt and Moses.
See the Interpreter's Dictionary.

Click to expand...

In Isaiah the Hebrew word is ח֣וּג The first letter represents a fence that goes around something. The second letter is a vav and this represents connection. The third letter represents a camel that is on a trade route. This is why circuit or to circle around something is a better word to use. "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in." Isaiah 40:22)Like a fense this has to do with the outer limits of the atmosphere or firmament. Like I said this is like a guard that goes around the outside of the area he is protecting. The way a fence goes around a city to protect the outer limits of that city.

There is a lot of information in this passage and many books could be written about this. The idea that God is on the outside looking in. Yet His desire is for Heaven and Earth to become one. For the skeptic and the scoffer He respects the fence that they build and he sits outside of that fence. But His desire is to regain what was lost and restore His creation to His plan and purpose. That is exactly what He is doing. This all has to do with the letter vav and the connection that letter makes. Even if we are still looking at the first and last letters of this word.

Cis.jd said:

Here. Look at this Christian sect in asia.. "rebuking tornado's by calling on God".

Click to expand...

Now, in the present this, is not history. I also see no reason to believe they reckon
God is angry. I can here calling "In Jesus name", and "Glory to God" and Thank you Jesus." Those are praise expressions.

Cis.jd said:

I don't believe there is a "supernatural" or a "natural", they are both the same.

Click to expand...

The super natural is the word people use when the natural is being restore. The natural does not restore itself. There has to a force outside of itself.

Cis.jd said:

How is this unsupported? These are historical facts..

Click to expand...

In accordance with your claim about science being the marker for what is true, your links are irrelevant.
You are not providing scientific support for your claims about the minds of people in the past.
You said science is the source of correcting truths, not out of date history.

Cis.jd said:

But in context with the question on point, do you believe a typical thunderstorm or random illnesses is all because "God is angry"?

Click to expand...

My faith is the basis for not believing God punishes on account of anger. Science has never informed me of anything to do with God.

Science provides information about the physically occurring processes, it is not in any way a viable source of awareness regarding characteristics of God. It makes no attempt to be.

MrsFoundit said:

Now, in the present this, is not history. I also see no reason to believe they reckon
God is angry. I can here calling "In Jesus name", and "Glory to God" and Thank you Jesus." Those are praise expressions.

Click to expand...

Ya, what that video is promoting is that they are actually rebuking a tornado through "supernatural" means. Do you believe they are really doing that or do you think there is a scientific explanation for it?

MrsFoundit said:

My faith is the basis for not believing God punishes on account of anger. Science has never informed me of anything to do with God.

Science provides information about the physically occurring processes, it is not in any way a viable source of awareness regarding characteristics of God. It makes no attempt to be.

Click to expand...

I understand that is your faith, but the argument we've been talking about is based on your comment about how science can't deal with the supernatural.
You say it's your faith but how do you know your faith is true and not theirs, especially since everyone has their own theology and claims their views are Biblically supported (whether good or bad)? We know yours is fact because there is scientific evidence that those calamities where not from an angry God.

joshua 1 9 said:

The super natural is the word people use when the natural is being restore. The natural does not restore itself. There has to a force outside of itself.

Click to expand...

natural is when supernatural is perfectly studied enough to gain comprehensible explanation. Like wise, the Bible itself is not a book of science and should not be used to fact check it. This has been taught by the church fathers such as St Augustine.

Cis.jd said:

Do you believe they are really doing that or do you think there is a scientific explanation for it?

Click to expand...

I believe you are presenting a false dichotomy, it is not either a prayer or science. If prayer can alter what happens in the physical, science would have no means of knowing about it. Science requires a physical start point to work from. Supernatural, by definition, is beyond natural (just break up the word!).

I would not claim any discernment from a you tube video, it may be that a prayer was answered, or that it appears to be so, I only watched it once, it could be entirely faked. If it was a prayer answered it was God, not people who moved a storm.

Cis.jd said:

I understand that is your faith, but the argument we've been talking about is based on your comment about how science can't deal with the supernatural.

Click to expand...

Faith is how I know God does not punish, not science. Science is an exploration of natural or physical
aspects, it cannot observe or inform my faith beyond physical aspects. God is not a physical aspect..

Cis.jd said:

You say it's your faith but how do you know your faith is true and not theirs,

Click to expand...

If this is about people staying in abusive situations on account of fear of judgement and legalism from a deity who punishes, the logical and experiential arguments to support it are absolutely abundant.

"Know" is a misapplied concept here, especially when you are arguing that science must be applied to faith based convictions, and that cannot be forced onto another person anyway. You are not making anyone safe by questioning how I know anything.

Cis.jd said:

especially since everyone has their own theology and claims their views are Biblically supported (whether good or bad)?

Click to expand...

They are all faith positions, none can be tested by scientific means.

Cis.jd said:

We know yours is fact because there is scientific evidence that those calamities where not from an angry God.

Click to expand...

"We" do not say this, you do. I do not. I have clearly said I reject your assertion that science can test the supernatural. Your disrespect for my faith is not welcome.

Cis.jd said:

This has been taught by the church fathers such as St Augustine.

Click to expand...

You do understand we are not all Roman Catholic?

Cis.jd said:

Do you believe they are really doing that or do you think there is a scientific explanation for it?

Click to expand...

false dichotomy - Wiktionary - my opinion is an option you are not including.

Cis.jd said:

the Bible itself is not a book of science and should not be used to fact check it.

Click to expand...

The Bible can very much be used to check science. Just as science can be used to verify that our Bible is true. God gave us both. Science is a study of His Creation.

MrsFoundit said:

You do understand we are not all Roman Catholic?

Click to expand...

There are 7 different churches. In Rev they began in 7 different cities. Some believe there are 7 ages also, but that has never been explained to me. There is a movement to unify the various churches and so a number of them use the book of common prayer.

joshua 1 9 said:

There are 7 different churches. In Rev they began in 7 different cities. Some believe there are 7 ages also, but that has never been explained to me. There is a movement to unify the various churches and so a number of them use the book of common prayer.

Click to expand...

I believe sincere Christians exist in all denominations and also outside of any, but on CF we are not all obliged to accept St Augustine as an authority. I was objecting only to an appeal to St Augustine in the context of a critique of my perspective.

As you are saying either the Bible can check on science, or science can check the Bible, I would not dispute that. I may need to give it further thought.

I usually say one cannot test the other. The Bible cannot "prove" science wrong and equally science cannot test the Bible. It may turn out that I can accept your way or mine, but certainly not that science can test personal statements of faith or appeals to the supernatural.

John 3:16 is how we know we are loved and who by, not modern science.

joshua 1 9 said:

The Bible can very much be used to check science. Just as science can be used to verify that our Bible is true. God gave us both. Science is a study of His Creation.

Click to expand...

The Bible can't check science. It's like using History to correct Algebra. Islam's Quran has more science facts in it, but this doesn't mean their book is Holy. It's just fortunate to be made during a time when knowledge about certain things was already known.

Just as I asked before, quote that verse in Genesis.

MrsFoundit said:

false dichotomy - Wiktionary - my opinion is an option you are not including.

Click to expand...

Well based on the discussion we've been having, I don't see why I am not. I know you are smart enough to understand that those people are factually NOT rebuking a tornado through supernatural means. You probably do agree on there being a scientific facts disproving it.


You are right that Science isn't about spirituality (regardless of their being ways we can connect psychology with spiritualism) but likewise the Bible isn't about science. So if science makes claims about certain things that appear to not match Genesis, we can't say it's just wrong because doing so can potential create a false and negative portrayal of the scriptures. God did not inspire these men to write about how the stars work, how our DNA is set up, etc.. but to reveal him.

Cis.jd said:

This is far out of context to what we are discussing. You are clearly making up stuff about what they did back then because it is factual that Christians accused Jews for causing the plague )which caused Pope Clement to issue a religious order to stop the violence) and other things such as profanity. They thought this plague was supernatural. Yet, you know now they are not so you know that any form of hardcore "repentance" is absolutely wrong even philosophical wise now all due to how science has shown how it happened and how it was stopped.

Click to expand...

It was interesting and insightful to read why it was Jews were being blamed for the plague. It seems that because the Jews in general were not being affected by it, it was suspected they were poisoning the wells of the rest of the population. We now know it was because the Jews followed the sanitation laws of the old testament whereas the the church then and now, thought they were above those requirements. Had it "repented" and issued an edict to tell people to wash their hands, bathe and throw their excrement outside of the cities, which those laws said to do in Deuteronomy and Leviticus, as well as observe guidelines related to childbirthing etc, the world wouldn't have needed to suffer a 30% reduction of its populations.

The science of sanitation in the Bible was almost 3000 years ahead of its time.

Cis.jd said:

Well based on the discussion we've been having, I don't see why I am not.

Click to expand...

In reality we do not essentially have to choose either spiritually explained or scientifically explained, you are presenting a false dichotomy. In my opinion, "smart" people are not those who believe in and apply your false dichotomy, and intelligence cannot accurately be attributed based on which of your restricted possibilities a person accepts.

Cis.jd said:

Science isn't about spirituality (regardless of their being ways we can connect psychology with spiritualism).

Click to expand...

Psyche means spirit, it is specified as synonymous Definition of PSYCHE. It is the same.

Spiritualism is an inappropriate word there, it is a specific religion, or religious concept. I will assume you meant spirituality.