• 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.

Bible-Creation-Evolution (3)

Greg1234

In the beginning was El
May 14, 2010
3,745
38
✟19,292.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Thank you.

So it is opinion then. Thanks for that I'm glad we got there eventually.

Now about this pyramid strawman...

The threshold is based on data. See any purely naturalistic unintelligent process in relation to the level of complexity found in the Great Pyramid or man. The threshold itself is not objective as any future naturalistic process can be asserted.

The Great Pyramid was determined to be intelligently designed based on the objective data and the faith that the Great Pyramid breaches the threshold of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes, in all time.
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,804
15,254
Seattle
✟1,194,263.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Already have. It is beyond the grasp of undirected naturalistic forces through observation and experimentation, and fits intelligent design through same. As with the Great Pyramid, it is established to be designed through taking a position based on data, not a universal standard. It's up to you to provide data that purely naturalistic unintelligent processes can form the level of complexity found in man.


No, you have not. You gave me a bunch of blather that tries to side step the fact that you can not back up your claims with hard data.

Prior to chatting here I was a member on an intelligent design website because I wanted to check out and see if they had actually found new information like they claimed. I found that they had a lot of bluster and bravado with nothing concrete to back it up. The emperor has no cloths Greg. Ta ta now. :wave:
 
Upvote 0

Greg1234

In the beginning was El
May 14, 2010
3,745
38
✟19,292.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No, you have not. You gave me a bunch of blather that tries to side step the fact that you can not back up your claims with hard data.
Yes I have. The threshold is evident through the data itself.


http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-19/#post57206524
It is simply through assessing the level of complexity found in said structure and the capabilities of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes acting in relation to it,

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/#post57212005
Already have. It is beyond the grasp of undirected naturalistic forces through observation and experimentation, and fits intelligent design through same


http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/
See any undirected process in relation to the Great Pyramid. An objective threshold was not needed for the Great Pyramid, and it isn't required now.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/
You have the property of intelligence which can be made available, purely naturalistic unintelligent processes and the level of complexity found in the structure. Through that, a position was And is being taken on the Great Pyramid.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-21/
The threshold is based on data. See any purely naturalistic unintelligent process in relation to the level of complexity found in the Great Pyramid or man.
Prior to chatting here I was a member on an intelligent design website because I wanted to check out and see if they had actually found new information like they claimed. I found that they had a lot of bluster and bravado with nothing concrete to back it up. The emperor has no cloths Greg. Ta ta now. :wave:
The problem is it's not us who need provide data. We already have it. You are the one who needs to provide evidence that purely naturalistic unintelligent processes are capable of building man. The same for the Great Pyramid. The intelligent design of the Great Pyramid is supported by the data.

No objective, unchanging, established for all time, threshold, was needed for that position to be held, just the threshold of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes. The same pervades the present. Likewise, if you have data showing that purely naturalistic unintelligent processes are capable of assembling the level of complexity found in man, you are free to begin. :wave:
 
Upvote 0

Belk

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2005
30,804
15,254
Seattle
✟1,194,263.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Yes I have. The threshold is evident through the data itself.


http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-19/#post57206524
It is simply through assessing the level of complexity found in said structure and the capabilities of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes acting in relation to it,

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/#post57212005
Already have. It is beyond the grasp of undirected naturalistic forces through observation and experimentation, and fits intelligent design through same


http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/
See any undirected process in relation to the Great Pyramid. An objective threshold was not needed for the Great Pyramid, and it isn't required now.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-20/
You have the property of intelligence which can be made available, purely naturalistic unintelligent processes and the level of complexity found in the structure. Through that, a position was And is being taken on the Great Pyramid.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7550583-21/
The threshold is based on data. See any purely naturalistic unintelligent process in relation to the level of complexity found in the Great Pyramid or man.

Yes, yes, we know. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. The data that I refuse to provide shows blah blah blah. Seen the song and dance before Greg. Until you show us data with confirmed results showing the ability to perform predictive analysis on ID versus natural design you have nothing more than your opinion which no one finds particularly convincing.


T
The problem is it's not us who need provide data. We already have it. You are the one who needs to provide evidence that purely naturalistic unintelligent processes are capable of building man. The same for the Great Pyramid. The intelligent design of the Great Pyramid is supported by the data.

No objective, unchanging, established for all time, threshold, was needed for that position to be held, just the threshold of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes. The same pervades the present. Likewise, if you have data showing that purely naturalistic unintelligent processes are capable of assembling the level of complexity found in man, you are free to begin. :wave:


It is called the modern syntheses of the theory of evolution and is the reigning champ among biological scientific theories. You want to knock it down, give it your best shot. Burden of proof is on you Greg, not the other way around. Feel free to give it your best shot. :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
It is called the modern syntheses of the theory of evolution and is the reigning champ among biological scientific theories. You want to knock it down, give it your best shot. Burden of proof is on you Greg, not the other way around. Feel free to give it your best shot. :thumbsup:

Sadly, I think this was his best shot.
 
Upvote 0

mzungu

INVICTUS
Dec 17, 2010
7,162
250
Earth!
✟32,475.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The data is objective, the threshold is not. A man, through his own volition, can still hypothesize that the Great Pyramid was not intelligently designed. The established fact today that the Great Pyramid is designed is based solely on a position held based on the data. You have the property of intelligence which can be made available, purely naturalistic unintelligent processes and the level of complexity found in the structure. Through that, a position was And is being taken on the Great Pyramid.

In short, the evidence for the intelligent design of the Great Pyramid is its integrated complexity and the property of intelligence. Through that, archeologists have faith that the Great Pyramid was intelligently designed.
YouTube - murder by death
 
Upvote 0

Greg1234

In the beginning was El
May 14, 2010
3,745
38
✟19,292.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Yes, yes, we know. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. The data that I refuse to provide shows blah blah blah. Seen the song and dance before Greg.

Don't get me wrong though, I do see the time-buying benefit in listing the minute-by-minute capabilities of purely naturalistic unintelligent processes, all the systems in every organism on earth, and you even get to say "how is the threshold objective? Did you go to every corner of the natural universe?" But guess what, if you have a purely naturalistic unintelligent process capable of building the integrated complexity in man, then present it. If you don't I'll just use the data. I do the same thing for the Great Pyramid.

Until you show us data with confirmed results showing the ability to perform predictive analysis on ID versus natural design you have nothing more than your opinion which no one finds particularly convincing.

Then archeology is not science, the Great Pyramid is not designed, we know nothing about what ancient civilizations have done. And instead of studying ancient civilizations, we now spend all our time trying to determine if the Great Pyramid is intelligently designed through an objective form of ID.
T


It is called the modern syntheses of the theory of evolution and is the reigning champ among biological scientific theories. You want to knock it down, give it your best shot. Burden of proof is on you Greg, not the other way around. Feel free to give it your best shot. :thumbsup:
I'll see you around :wave:
 
Upvote 0

mzungu

INVICTUS
Dec 17, 2010
7,162
250
Earth!
✟32,475.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I guess he forgot, or he doesn't have a response...

Here's the question again...

If something is perfect, does that mean it must also be complex?
You should know better when debating with creationists. They will either avoid answering or just do what they know what to do best; Make up an answer!^_^:wave:
 
Upvote 0

Inan3

Veteran Saint
Jul 22, 2007
3,376
88
West of the Mississippi
✟27,875.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I can't speak for them, but for me, it wasn't about an allegiance to science, but a commitment to reality. And it wasn't about unanswered questions of religion but the answered ones that led me away from it.

I'd be very interested to hear what questions you had answered which led you away from it... if you would care to share.

I find it quite the opposite. I haven't found one thing that can do more than speculate about what might have occured. I prefer the scriptures which tell us exactly how it occured.

If a state of grace exists, it'll be consistent with reality, not against it.

And by this you mean....?

I find that grace is very consistant with reality, so I'd like to hear why you think it is not.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,282
52,673
Guam
✟5,161,312.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You should know better when debating with creationists. They will either avoid answering or just do what they know what to do best; Make up an answer!^_^:wave:
I find from experience that that usually occurs after having answered one or more questions first.

The 'avoid answering' and/or 'making up answers' is usually a result of leading questions, a.k.a. suggestive interrogation.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Faith Guardian, you might want to take a look around you -- at some of the other posters here like Split Rock, Thaumaturgy, Nathan Poe, and California [something].

These guys, at one time, were where you are now -- i.e. Church-going believers who read their Bibles.

But at some point in their life, their allegiance to science led them to having questions that their undershepherds couldn't answer, and the cognitive dissonance was so great, they are now no longer believers -- (guys, please correct me, if I'm wrong).

In my case, since I was called out by name there, I'll tell you what the millieu was:

I was a scientist and like so many scientists around me had no problem between my science and my faith. My faith, however, was not providing me with anything like "comfort". It was, if only because of some quirk of brain chemistry, providing me with almost non-stop feelings of guilt and failure.

Perhaps you've heard of a fine little mental illness called scrupulosity which afflicts some. Supposedly Martin Luther suffered. However our paths diverged somewhat.

For me religion was always a matter of "fact" and that I had to force-fit the world into those facts, no matter the cost. Then one day I started to entertain the idea that maybe that wasn't the way I had to do it. I could maybe try looking at the thing "t'other way 'round" if you will.

If I started from "no God" and worked through the world around me. Turns out it made a lot more sense to me.

I still have a lot of Christian friends (in fact almost exclusively so), whom I greatly respect and whose faith I would never want to take away from them.

I would hope beyond hope that anyone who finds themselves at a crossroads between belief and non-belief makes the decision solely based on their own gut. Their own motives.

As an atheist today I would never in a million years want to eliminate someone's faith from them. I would never want to "de-convert" someone. But I'm glad for the atheist authors out there whom I've read to show me that my thought processes weren't sui generis. That I was walking down paths others had found worked for them.

I spent a lot of time reading the history of the Church and the Bible (sans Apocrypha) and came away with a very different view than I started from. But that's just for me. I've found atheist authors who have helped me feel less alone.

I don't think I could be an agressive atheist "proselytizer" like Sam Harris, Hutchins, Dawkins, or even Penn Jillette. But I'm glad they are out there to give the other side of the story for those who find themselves questioning.

Atheism isn't for everyone, but by the same token atheism isn't a direct outcome of scientific training either. As I said I know many many scientists who are christians. Some of my dearest friends in the sciences are christians and I'm glad they are who they are.

Follow the path your questions take you and only go those places you feel comfortable in. Faith helps a lot of people. But for some of us it was harmful but opened a door to show us another path.
 
Upvote 0

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I find it quite the opposite. I haven't found one thing that can do more than speculate about what might have occured. I prefer the scriptures which tell us exactly how it occured.


And how do you know the scriptures tell you exactly what happened?


 
Upvote 0
J

Jazer

Guest
It was, if only because of some quirk of brain chemistry, providing me with almost non-stop feelings of guilt and failure.
Those feeling were an attack from satan to get you to abandon your faith. They are called mind battles. You signed your soul over to the devil and he quit attacking you because he had you in his camp. Everyone goes though a time of testing to see if they give in or they overcome adversity.

Genesis 4:6-7 (NKJV)
6 So the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”

Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. James 4 7
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,546
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yep. And I've often wondered also: Miracles, the Hand of God, and the like were frequently seen in biblical times, so what happened? How come god never visibly intervenes now like he allegedly did in the past? You know, something we can see...

False hope disappoints, but G-d never disappoints. (IOW, you have some facts wrong here)

Mr T, that is a ludicrous question. How in the world did conversation ever turn to that?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,546
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Those feeling were an attack from satan to get you to abandon your faith. They are called mind battles. You signed your soul over to the devil and he quit attacking you because he had you in his camp. Everyone goes though a time of testing to see if they give in or they overcome adversity.

Actually when I read about Thaumaturgy's guilt, i immediately thought of false teaching. Which means we both are in full agreement :)

False teaching is perhaps the most common form of satanic attack ...

@ Thaumaturgy: how many versions of Romans 8:1 have you read? Not enough to defeat the guilt somebody decided you needed to be saddled with. PSA: guilt is from satan, conviction is from G-d. How much of our cumulative scientific advancement began with G-d given conviction, which then spurred people on to do the hard work of science, discovering where their gut feeling was right ans where it was wrong? Both are equally as joyful for those who love the Truth.
 
Upvote 0