Different state past

[TeddyReceptus]

By any chance, did you see my rant here?

Acts 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

But please be fair, _you_ were the one who took the other poster to task with this statement:

"The purity of everything will drive you guys nuts, won't it?"

Those are your words.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

But please be fair, _you_ were the one who took the other poster to task with this statement:

"The purity of everything will drive you guys nuts, won't it?"

Those are your words.

Is AV claiming to hear voices from heaven? If so, there's a DSM IV code for that.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Just interested in understanding your Christianity.

To be honest, AV1611VETS's version of Christianity has so little to do with the Christianity I'm familiar with that the name is meaningless really.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

To be honest, AV1611VETS's version of Christianity has so little to do with the Christianity I'm familiar with that the name is meaningless really.

Maybe it's a "Different State Christianity" where Jesus liked guns.

 

[FreethinkerWWJD]

Yup, Different State Past "theory" is undefeatable because it can NEVER be proven wrong!

If you don't understand why this is ridiculous then any further meaningful discussion is pointless.

I was a creationist not long ago, and I know I would have laughed at you if you proposed something like this to me then.

I can almost smell the sweat of desperation coming from these creationists every time they post stuff like this.

You are obviously grasping at straws if you can stretch verses about thorns, legless serpents, and pain in child birth into "reality was completely different before the fall!"

Let me remind you that death is a required part of life. Nothing can eat without killing something. So obviously there was death before the fall otherwise everything would have starved.

Didn't you ever think that maybe the death from sin was "spiritual death" and not physical death?

Your hypothesis makes a LOT of assumptions and none of them can ever be demonstrated; so the whole premise is false.

I could concoct a detailed theory about a cosmic aardvark named Ted who existed before the big bang but it would be completely useless as science.

Creationist thinking is also completely useless. It explains nothing, predicts nothing, and doesn't help us understand or better apply ANYTHING.

Creationists, stop being useless and put all that brain power into something that's going to actually make a difference. Please.

-God Bless

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Yup, Different State Past "theory" is undefeatable because it can NEVER be proven wrong!

If you don't understand why this is ridiculous then any further meaningful discussion is pointless.

Then you've figured out the "Dad Experience".

Let me remind you that death is a required part of life. Nothing can eat without killing something. So obviously there was death before the fall otherwise everything would have starved.

Unless the different state past things didn't need to eat to live. (remember "energy" and "entropy" and "thermodynamics" mean nothing in this different past)

Didn't you ever think that maybe the death from sin was "spiritual death" and not physical death?

There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that could be what the Bible meant. Otherwise the Bible would have said "spiritual death".

I could concoct a detailed theory about a cosmic aardvark named Ted who existed before the big bang but it would be completely useless as science.

Ted was a demon. Evil cosmic aardvark who fell from grace. In the beginning Ted waddled around with God as he strolled the cosmos. Then one day Ted decided he was as good as God and he attempted to raise himself above God and run the Universe.

But God was one step ahead and booted Ted to the outer darkness where there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Oh yeah and a lot of ants.

Creationist thinking is also completely useless. It explains nothing, predicts nothing, and doesn't help us understand or better apply ANYTHING.

Is it supposed to do any of that?

Creationists, stop being useless and put all that brain power into something that's going to actually make a difference. Please.

-God Bless

But then they wouldn't be creationists would they? May as well ask them to dedicate their lives to worshipping Ted.

 

[dad]

Yup, Different State Past "theory" is undefeatable because it can NEVER be proven wrong!

Thanks for admitting it. So if you were a bible believer would you not want something that could never be wrong?

I was a creationist not long ago, and I know I would have laughed at you if you proposed something like this to me then.

I laugh still. God is funny.

I can almost smell the sweat of desperation coming from these creationists every time they post stuff like this.

Now now, don't project.

You are obviously grasping at straws if you can stretch verses about thorns, legless serpents, and pain in child birth into "reality was completely different before the fall!"

Right on up till after the flood as well. Tribulation also and millennium.

Creationist thinking is also completely useless. It explains nothing, predicts nothing, and doesn't help us understand or better apply ANYTHING.

False. It dispels the lies. It restores meaning to the universe.

 

[CabVet]

Thanks for admitting it. So if you were a bible believer would you not want something that could never be wrong?

Oh, you like logical fallacies, here are a few other statements that can never be proved wrong:

1. Manbearpig (replace with any mythical being) exists.
2. The universe is the product of design.
3. Human civilization is the product of a "matrix" style simulation.
4. There are other multiple parallel universes.
5. I have an invisible dragon in my garden.
6. A deity created the universe yesterday with embedded history and memories.

Want more?

 

[dad]

Oh, you like logical fallacies, here are a few other statements that can never be proved wrong:

1. Manbearpig (replace with any mythical being) exists.
2. The universe is the product of design.
3. Human civilization is the product of a "matrix" style simulation.
4. There are other multiple parallel universes.
5. I have an invisible dragon in my garden.
6. A deity created the universe yesterday with embedded history and memories.

Want more?

Why would anyone care for a long list of what science can't prove wrong? That is increasingly clear. No surprises there. What you need is a short list of things you can prove! Starting with the laws in the past that you have used to model fantasy past primordial fantasy lands.

 

[Tiberius]

Still not producing evidence? Sigh. Can't say I'm surprised...

 

[Elendur]

Why would anyone care for a long list of what science can't prove wrong? That is increasingly clear. No surprises there. What you need is a short list of things you can prove! Starting with the laws in the past that you have used to model fantasy past primordial fantasy lands.

False.
Try again.

 

[TeddyReceptus]

Why would anyone care for a long list of what science can't prove wrong?

CabVet is trying to be clever to you Dad. He's talking about a concept the Science Slaves call "unfalsifiability". If you propose an idea that can't even be shown how to "falsify" it, then you haven't provided anything of value.

Even if your idea is RIGHT it has to have something about it that tells you how to test AGAINST IT. So if you know what to look for to prove it wrong. If you can't prove it wrong then you have a really strong idea.

But if you come up with an idea that doesn't even have the ability to be falsified then you can't even test the idea and it doesn't have any value in science (or logic really).

But you and I both know God doesn't care about science or logic or even giving his followers a reason to believe in anything that can even be remotely "tested". The strength of belief comes from its purity and faith.

This is the problem with the Science Slaves. They can't just take someone's word for it. Always gotta test stuff!

That is increasingly clear. No surprises there. What you need is a short list of things you can prove!

That'd be pretty short for scientists indeed! Because I don't think scientists ever "prove" anything. They always just come up with a lot of evidence in support of something. I think mathematicians and moonshiners are the ones capable of "proof".

 

[Elendur]

That'd be pretty short for scientists indeed! Because I don't think scientists ever "prove" anything. They always just come up with a lot of evidence in support of something. I think mathematicians and moonshiners are the ones capable of "proof".

This was great Thank you!

 

[dad]

False.
Try again.

Why would anyone care for a long list of what science can't prove wrong? That is increasingly clear. No surprises there. What you need is a short list of things you can prove! Starting with the laws in the past that you have used to model fantasy past primordial fantasy lands.

 

[Elendur]

Why would anyone care for a long list of what science can't prove wrong? That is increasingly clear. No surprises there. What you need is a short list of things you can prove! Starting with the laws in the past that you have used to model fantasy past primordial fantasy lands.

I was trying to make a point. No list is needed, since nothing can ever be proven, except in strict theoretical models like math.

You're, again, using the wrong term.

 

[dad]

CabVet is trying to be clever to you Dad. He's talking about a concept the Science Slaves call "unfalsifiability". If you propose an idea that can't even be shown how to "falsify" it, then you haven't provided anything of value.

Falsify a same state past then!

Even if your idea is RIGHT it has to have something about it that tells you how to test AGAINST IT. So if you know what to look for to prove it wrong. If you can't prove it wrong then you have a really strong idea.

Absurd. Your physical only science is a little mouse compared to the lion of a spiritual also affected past. Your mouse cannot prove it right or wrong.

But if you come up with an idea that doesn't even have the ability to be falsified then you can't even test the idea and it doesn't have any value in science (or logic really).

Get over the notion that science has the ability to falsify even what it bases all it's models on! (forget anything beyond that)

But you and I both know God doesn't care about science or logic or even giving his followers a reason to believe in anything that can even be remotely "tested". The strength of belief comes from its purity and faith.

No. God is a Scientist. So called science folks are deluded worldly wise men.

This is the problem with the Science Slaves. They can't just take someone's word for it. Always gotta test stuff!

Then they can be fishbowl slaves.

That'd be pretty short for scientists indeed! Because I don't think scientists ever "prove" anything. They always just come up with a lot of evidence in support of something. ...

Evidence for a same state past?

 

[dad]

I was trying to make a point. No list is needed, since nothing can ever be proven, except in strict theoretical models like math.

You're, again, using the wrong term.

Says who? The bible is about proof. God proves us. He proved Himself to us. Science is about doubting proof and telling fables that cannot be true or proven.

 

[Elendur]

Says who? The bible is about proof. God proves us. He proved Himself to us. Science is about doubting proof and telling fables that cannot be true or proven.

If you remove the first question you've actually succeeded in writing something containing 100% lies and assumptions.

Or is it perhaps that you don't understand the implications and meaning of proof?

 

[dad]

If you remove the first question you've actually succeeded in writing something containing 100% lies and assumptions.

Or is it perhaps that you don't understand the implications and meaning of proof?

No, what I said was true. God knows what proof is. He knows how to manifest Himself to us when we ask Him to.

Science knows squat. It models fantasy worlds and alternate creations and universes in a speck.

 

[Elendur]

No, what I said was true. God knows what proof is. He knows how to manifest Himself to us when we ask Him to.

Science knows squat. It models fantasy worlds and alternate creations and universes in a speck.

Says who? The bible is about proof. God proves us. He proved Himself to us. Science is about doubting proof and telling fables that cannot be true or proven.

If I divide your posts into parts:

1. "The bible is about proof."
2. "God proves us."
3. "He proved Himself to us."
4. "Science is about doubting proof and telling fables that cannot be true or proven."

_________

5. "God knows what proof is."
6. "He knows how to manifest Himself to us when we ask Him to."
7. "Science knows squat."
8. "It models fantasy worlds and alternate creations and universes in a speck."

1 is an assumption.
2 is an assumption.
3 is a lie.
4 is a lie.
5 is an assumption, or perhaps true per definition.
6 is a lie.
7 is, by definition, true. Since science is a concept. That statement is also nonsensical.
8 is possibly true, I see no problems with using science for models.

Note how point 1-4 are from your first post. Note how they are only lies and assumptions.

That's what I wrote.