How old is the earth?

[tonychanyt]

Then ignore my analogy.

The point remains: Falseness is falseness.

Define falseness operationally.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Define falseness operationally.

Something is false, when that something is not true.

E.g.
1 + 1 = 3 is a false statement. Which makes it a non-true statement.

-CryptoLUtheran

 

[tonychanyt]

Something is false, when that something is not true.

E.g.
1 + 1 = 3 is a false statement. Which makes it a non-true statement.

-CryptoLUtheran

Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.

Is P1 true? Can you apply your definition of falseness to find out whether P1 is true or not?

When you say "falseness is falseness", that is a redundant tautology. It has no operational semantics.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.

Is P1 true? Can you apply your definition of falseness to find out whether P1 is true or not?

I have no idea if it is true. The premise is unfalsifiable.

When you say "falseness is falseness", that is a tautology. It has no operational semantics.

Let P1 = God created the universe
Let P2 = The universe bears witness to X
Let P3 = X is not true

What conclusion ought to be reached based on these premises?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[tonychanyt]

I have no idea if it is true. The premise is unfalsifiable.

Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.

Are you saying that P1 is unfalsifiable?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Let P1 = There are aliens on other planets.

Are you saying that P1 is unfalsifiable?

Of course it's unfalsifiable. There is insufficient data to say one way or the other.

There may be life on other planets.
There may not be life on other planets.

What is the relevance of this to the present topic?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[tonychanyt]

Of course it's unfalsifiable. There is insufficient data to say one way or the other.

That is not the definition of unfalsifiable.

 

[BurningBush84]

Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”. John 2:19

So Jesus actually meant 3,000 years ????

 

[ViaCrucis]

That is not the definition of unfalsifiable.

Something is unfalsifiable when it can't be falsified. That happens when there is, for example, a lack of data. We simply do not have the information required to be able to say whether or not life does, or even if life could, exist on planets other than earth.

So, yes, the premise is, at present, unfalsifiable. It could become falsifiable at some point. But there is nothing we can do, at present, to test the veracity of the premise. We lack any means to explore, whether in person or through machine, the many worlds that exist across the universe. There is nothing we can do to test the hypothesis of there being life anywhere else besides earth. That makes it falsifiable, at least right now.

Can we stop playing games now?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[tonychanyt]

Something is unfalsifiable when it can't be falsified.

https://simplicable.com/science/falsifiability:

The statement "aliens don't exist" is falsifiable.​

 

[BNR32FAN]

There is no correct interpretation. We have to go back and study the original language. Only Jesus can add to what we receive from Moses. So we can always go back to see what Moses says about something.

There has to be a correct interpretation otherwise it couldn’t be a true story.

 

[ViaCrucis]

https://simplicable.com/science/falsifiability:

The statement "aliens don't exist" is falsifiable.​

Alright, here's the hypothesis: There is life on other planets.

How do you plan on testing that hypothesis?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[tonychanyt]

Alright, here's the hypothesis: There is life on other planets.

How do you plan on testing that hypothesis?

-CryptoLutheran

I have no such plan.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I have no such plan.

What was the point of this alien life tangent?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[tonychanyt]

The point remains: Falseness is falseness.

My point is this: That is a redundant tautology. It carries no operational meaning. It is useless in an argumentation.

You need to find another angle to continue the argument.

 

[Diamond72]

Alright, here's the hypothesis: There is life on other planets.

How do you plan on testing that hypothesis?

There could very well be life on other planets. The issue has to do with how likely we are to interact with them. The natural laws remain consistent and the same anywhere we go. All the elements remain the same. So if life formed here is could just as easily form on another sun and another planet off somewhere.

 

[Diamond72]

There has to be a correct interpretation otherwise it couldn’t be a true story.

There are rules for interpretation that we learn in Bible School. Jesus tells us that we are to become like children and they have a more literal understanding of the Bible.

 

[steve78]

Of course it's unfalsifiable. There is insufficient data to say one way or the other.

There may be life on other planets.
There may not be life on other planets.

What is the relevance of this to the present topic?

-CryptoLutheran

There is life on other planets. We can easily work this out using the size of the universe, amount of planets and stars. Our milky way galaxy alone contains around 100 billions planets. Out of these there are estimated to be around 300 millions habitable worlds in the universe. Basically it is impossible for Earth to be unique and contain life.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There are rules for interpretation that we learn in Bible School. Jesus tells us that we are to become like children and they have a more literal understanding of the Bible.

I don’t see how interpreting Exodus 20:11 figuratively is considered a literal interpretation. I do interpret Exodus 20:11 literally to mean that everything was created in 6 literal days.

 

[Diamond72]

I don’t see how interpreting Exodus 20:11 figuratively is considered a literal interpretation.

The different levels of interpretation include:

1. Literal Level: This level involves understanding the text at its face value, considering the historical context, language, and straightforward meaning of the words. The literal level is concerned with what the text explicitly says.
2. Historical Level: This level involves examining the historical and cultural context in which the text was written. Understanding the historical background helps to illuminate the intended meaning of the text for its original audience.
3. Symbolic or Allegorical Level: This level involves interpreting the text symbolically or allegorically, where the events, characters, or elements in the text represent deeper spiritual or moral truths. This level seeks to find hidden or spiritual meanings beyond the literal sense.
4. Moral or Ethical Level: This level involves drawing practical lessons and ethical teachings from the text. It focuses on the moral and ethical implications of the narrative or teachings presented.
5. Typological Level: This level involves recognizing certain people, events, or objects in the Old Testament (types) that prefigure or foreshadow greater truths fulfilled in the New Testament (antitypes). It involves seeing connections between the Old and New Testaments.
6. Eschatological Level: This level involves considering prophetic or end-time themes found in the text and exploring their implications for future events.

These various levels of interpretation do not necessarily contradict one another; rather, they complement and enrich the understanding of the biblical text. Many passages in the Bible can have multiple layers of meaning, and different interpretations can coexist without undermining the truth of the message.

The principle of interpreting the Bible on multiple levels allows for deeper insights and a richer understanding of God's Word, encouraging believers to engage in thoughtful study and meditation on the scriptures.