[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] A problem at the bottom of reason

[True Scotsman]

Hopefully, the operator is.

It might be a computer. And relying on the results of the experiment would presuppose that we could accurately read the dials and read outs of the instrument doing the measuring without affecting them.

 

[fatherjimparker]

(1) One must first assume that the one who said it is God.
(2) Also truth is an attribute of identification.
(3) It is conceptual in nature.
(4) If you want to say that God is a concept I don't have a problem with that except to say that it would only be a concept in way that a writer comes up with a concept for a character.
(5) A true concept is a mental integration of two or more concretes and God is supposed to be unique.

(1) He said He was. I have no reason to doubt Him.
(2) That is a philosophical construct which may or may not have any connection to reality.
(3) Truth is a concrete reality; His name is Wonderful Counselor, The Mighty God, the Prince of Peace, AKA: Jesus of Nazareth, the Word of God.
(4) I don't want to say God is a concept any more than I would want to say that you are a concept.
(5) Yes, God is unique.

The problem with philosophy is that, while philosophers argue about the existence of their dinner, they starve to death.

 

[HitchSlap]

[No Demon'(stration) Baggage Beyond This Point]

Evidences from this world are just as unacceptable in God's spiritual realm, as spiritual evidences are in the natural/scientific realm. Thus, it is impossible to relate or relay, in such terms. Demanding such terms is futile. The spiritual parties have allowed for and do concede to the natural/scientific evidence (except when it is known to be in error according to the greater authority of Him who create the natural/scientific realm, in which case it would not serve anyone to let it go, even to appease). The natural/scientific parties have yet to concede that there is anything beyond their realm, even though many have admitted that it is possible. Natural and supernatural. What a concept. It's not that difficult.


Of course, in fact, I have said that it is not I who can reveal it to you.

So, if you are tracking so far: There are two distinct realities, where the supernatural supersedes the natural, the supernatural being the only true reality, while the natural reality is [even scientifically] an illusion (a closed circuit world, created for demon'stration of the supernatural reality). The handwriting is not only on the wall, it is blatant.

In order to know of the greater spiritual reality, one must ask...not in unbelief, but in sincerity. Seek and ye shall find.

Metaphysical woo-woo.

 

[fatherjimparker]

It might be a computer. And relying on the results of the experiment would presuppose that we could accurately read the dials and read outs of the instrument doing the measuring without affecting them.

That has worked pretty well so far. It has enabled man to go from the first powered flight to landing a man on the moon in 67 years.

They must have been reading the dials correctly.

 

[HitchSlap]

Truth Is Jesus, according to Jesus.

The problem with "non-contradictory, objective identification of the facts of reality" is that quantum mechanics has demonstrated that objective reality changes when you observe it.

If Jesus ever wrote anything, it didn't survive, so we have no idea of anything Jesus was according to.

 

[fatherjimparker]

If Jesus ever wrote anything, it didn't survive, so we have no idea of anything Jesus was according to.

That is nonsense.

If you don't want to believe, just say so. You don't have to fabricate excuses.

 

[True Scotsman]

Well then what's the problem. If anything proves that we are able to observe reality without changing it it is the photos coming back from the Pluto probe. The fact that it is actually there is the result of a process where a tiny error would spell disaster. Also if it is true that observing a photon collapses the wave function, then that fact would obtain independently of anyone's conscious wishes or desires. Our senses work by being effected by the objects in reality, it's not at all unreasonable that this physical process would effect the photons in that interaction. It would be a part of the causal process that enables us to see. It would be a part of our means of awareness. The fact that our means of awareness has a specific set of attributes and acts in specific ways is what makes them possible

 

[ScottA]

Metaphysical woo-woo.

nOW...don't be tempted to look at things through worldly glasses and revert back to worldly terms. That will just mess you up. If you just stay on the shore and woo-woo, you may as well be the kid who was told not to get wet ... Jump in!

 

[HitchSlap]

That is nonsense.

If you don't want to believe, just say so. You don't have to fabricate excuses.

Nothing survives that Jesus wrote.

 

[HitchSlap]

nOW...don't be tempted to look at things through worldly glasses and revert back to worldly terms. That will just mess you up. If you just stay on the shore and woo-woo, you may as well be the kid who was told not to get wet ... Jump in!

The only person messed up here is the one who believes in metaphysical woo-woo. Good on ya'.

 

[ScottA]

The only person messed up here is the one who believes in metaphysical woo-woo. Good on ya'.

Okay...the Earth is flat...then.

 

[dlamberth]

The only person messed up here is the one who believes in metaphysical woo-woo. Good on ya'.

Boy...am I ever messed than.

.

 

[fatherjimparker]

Nothing survives that Jesus wrote.

As best we know, He didn't write anything except when he wrote in the dirt and no one knows what He wrote there and it was soon gone with the wind.

So what?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Truth Is Jesus, according to Jesus.

The problem with "non-contradictory, objective identification of the facts of reality" is that quantum mechanics has demonstrated that objective reality changes when you observe it.

When did quantum mechanics demonstrate that?

 

[True Scotsman]

(2) That is a philosophical construct which may or may not have any connection to reality.

Really? Then the same would apply to your statement. So in other words we can't know anything for sure except the Bible is true, is that it? Give me a break.

 

[madera23]

Nothing survives that Jesus wrote.

"Nothing survives that Jesus wrote?"

Not so! I did.

 

[fatherjimparker]

When did quantum mechanics demonstrate that?

Demonstrate which, that Jesus is the Truth or that reality changes when observed?

 

[fatherjimparker]

Really? Then the same would apply to your statement. So in other words we can't know anything for sure except the Bible is true, is that it? Give me a break.

Those are your "other words", not mine.

Take a break.

 

[madera23]

If Jesus ever wrote anything, it didn't survive, so we have no idea of anything Jesus was according to.

What did Jesus write that didn't survive?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Demonstrate which, that Jesus is the Truth or that reality changes when observed?

I was talking about reality changing when observed. I didn't think quantum mechanics got into Jesus much.