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.
That's true.. but the flaw isn't logic.. it's in our understanding.. what's logical now... may not be so logical once more is revealed to us. I've believed things with everything in me.. and they were completely wrong. my thought and capacity isn't absolute. But absolute logic is.The most logical answers are not necessarily the correct answers.
I don't claim we have freewill.. I state that it's very probable that we don't. I came to the conclusion long ago that YOU make the choices.. but you didn't get to pick who "YOU" are.. so there's a conflict there. I believe we have Freewill because I have faith that we are really separated from the events that created us. And even with freewill.. without a certain level of intelligence you're at the mercy of the environment. You could lose yourself. You could become a robot making decisions based on complete misunderstanding of the consequence of your action.If we take the second of your two proposed options, that who we are is based solely on the effects, etc. then clearly we do not have free will. Yet you claim that we do. Please apply the critical thinking you noted earlier as being important and recognise that is illogical.
Rocks do not have free will. A rock rolling down a hillside under the influence of gravity has no free will. According to you it simply does not exist. Aha! I've wasted a significant part of my life studying things that do not exit. Alas!
I follow the principle that logic
is generally held to consist of the systematic study of the form of arguments. A valid argument is one where there is a specific relation of logical support between the assumptions of the argument and its conclusion.*
In serious discussions it is normal to use the accepted meaning of words. My starting issue is that you do not appear to be using the accepted meaning of logic. This will make further discussion at best, difficult, and at worst, impossible.
That said, I can just about twist your words around to get a fit between your definition and the accepted one. Unfortunately, I then find - so far - no instances where you have made an ordered argument.
The beliefs in the balance of your post do seem consistent, yet contradict your earlier assertions. Frankly, your posts seem all over the place. That might be me. I'm signing off from further conversation with you today, but shall read all of your post tomorrow and see if I can detect a sensible pattern.
It's just a thought, but many readers are more readily persuaded by an argument when the argument is not presented in a patronising tone.
Sure. Ask your friend to show you real evidence for evolution.
Ask for him to take you to any museum and share the evidence of species transitioning from one species to another.
Ask him to show you how kidneys evolved, or the liver or the spleen or the heart and circulatory system evolved. Ask for the evidence. Ask him to prove it.
You know dinosaurs had all the body components - skeleton; muscles, organs, digestive systems;eyes; brains; spinal cords; etc etc etc - they died out some supposed 65 million years ago and ruled the world for hundreds of millions of years before.
So if dinosaurs had everything to be complex warm blooded animals and reproduce then just when did all these necessary body parts evolve to allow for this? and from what?
Show me the evolution of the eyes and sight:
Water puts out fire.. why? Says who? Who says that the interaction between water and fire happens the way it does? Where did this definition come from? God.
And that chemical reaction responds according to blueprints.Fire is merely a chemical reaction ...
Because logic exists. Because science exists. ... and most importantly.. because we can THINK. without structure.. there is no thought. There is no reason to have a mind if everything just does anything.
: )
Just as the objects require creation.. the laws governing interaction in the physical world (definition)... require creation as well.
Because the universe is not in anarchy, it is in entropy.Why?
He can believe whatever he likes, as can you and I; we all may even believe the same thing in this case. But if he claims that his belief is supported by logic, he should provide a logical argument. That has so far been lacking.I can't speak for him, but I think he's making the point that, as implied in this passage:
Colossians 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
... God set up the universe in such a way that its physical laws "dovetail" into each other and all fit together like a hand in a glove.
No. In fact, no one knows what gravity is. We know that matter behaves in certain ways, and we call that behavior "gravity".We all know what gravity is right?
Because electricity is mediated by a spin-1 boson while gravity is mediated by a spin-2 boson. At least that's the speculation, although no one has come up with a testable quantum theory of gravity.But why does gravity behave the way it does? Why isn't gravity and electricity the same thing?
No offense but the concept is beyond your intellectual capabilities.Actually blankets, dirt, shaving cream and lime Jello put out fire as well. Fire is merely a chemical reaction and anything that prevents the fuel from getting oxygen with extinguish the flame. There's nothing special about water and there is no interaction between the two.
He may be of the persuasion that Jesus is the Logos; i.e., logic personified (John 1:1).He can believe whatever he likes, as can you and I; we all may even believe the same thing in this case. But if he claims that his belief is supported by logic, he should provide a logical argument. That has so far been lacking.
I have a mate of mine who tells me Islam is definitely the last true religion and that Christianity is just confused, and the Prophet Jesus (may peace be upon him) will be back to tell you all so too...
Not really sure which one you're referring me to, so I'll assume you meant this one?:
These days, they trust me and my guidance based on experience even though it still in part comes down to respect as their authority figure... so again, experience and reason.
On trust and faith definitions and conflating the two:
Again, not sure which one you intend me to look at, so I'll assume this is it?:
So did as instructed - I see you included the first definition from Google, which was the non-religious definition of Faith, but you for some odd reason, didn't include the definition of Faith as it relates to religion - that is "2. strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof." - ...."rather than proof"!! so, still back to evidence free belief
....so Faith in your version of the bible is "confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see" - nothing about evidence or reason? If Faith is "Total Trust" then ought we not be really, really sure about it before putting so much stock in something? I for one, would want absolute verification before investing so much of myself for so long in such a thing
Atheists get it just fine, this is why we don't just believe without evidence first. Put 'Theory' in front of it all you like, but the evidence still won't be there to support it. Again, every religion out there has this kind of unevidenced "Faith"
.
So, on my experiences with chairs point:
I go into construction sites all the time. Back to this point though because this is hilarious, if I see a chair work, see other people use a chair, have the operation and purpose of a chair explained to me, how is my use of that chair as prescribed then some kind of Assuption?? Are you trying to tell me that everyone's reality is only real for them? Do we not share this same reality with everyone else??
On my trust in my coworkers:
..and of course, Trust (you literally just said "Noyou have trust in their abilities"!!).... There is no such thing as 100% Trust, we deal in degrees of certainty. I wouldn't trust someone straight off the bat if I didn't have evidence of their abilities/capabilities...
Exactly. Its not like cars and airplanes to crash!
Because I have experience of such, and is therefore not Faith. Unless of course you still insist that Faith & Trust are the same thing?
Have you tried?
When I was younger, yes. Not that I really had any direction, so nothing ever popped into my head as being something I should take notice of... this point alone should be cause forconcern - if there is an all-omnipotent, omnipresent being who wanted to have a relationship with me, I would've been all in, hook, line and sinker! but nuthn....
Do fairies answer prayers, give Visions and perform the miraculous?
Don't know about Visions (perhaps you should see someone about that??) but Fairies answer prayers and perform the miraculous at exactly the same r
Do fairies answer prayers, give Visions and perform the miraculous?
Don't know about Visions (perhaps you should see someone about that??) but Fairies answer prayers and perform the miraculous at exactly the same rate as intercessory prayer does.
You may think it fine in your position if you agree with their religious position but how different might you feel if the people in power were Islamic? Given extreme forms of Islam (read: ISIS and Taliban among many) consider Christianity to be Polytheism, and punishable by Death.
I guess American History isn't so innocent though, how long was it legal to kill Mormons on site because it was considered a Cult? That was a decision made on the faith based belief that Mormonism was Blasphemy of the highest order.
but it doesn't even have to go that far - I see all too often parents who let their children die because their religion had them believing prayer would cure them of their easily treatable and normally trivial medical issue had they just popped along to their local Doctor.
These kids often die in writhing pain even though I'm sure their parents loved them every bit as much as they could, it's their Faith based belief in their religion that killed them. Evidenced medicine be damned, they had FAITH!
I already have. I have friends in a number of other religions and they tell me Exactly the same thing you're telling me - literally, "You just gotta have Faith..."! So I guess you were wrong to assume I hadn't looked into this.
Are they wrong? Should I ask them if You're wrong? What do you think they'll tell me?
This is exactly why I'd never assume a religious position without evidence since Faith in a religious context is the worst way to come about the truth of something,
what if I wind up following the wrong religion and upsetting the true creator(s) of the universe?
If there is an Omnipotent and Omnipresent Divine Creator of the universe that wants a relationship with me and needs my tythe, then surely that being would know how to get through to me, right?
This seems very basic to us.. believe it or not it's an incredibly deep concept that many people don't have the intellectual capacity to understand. I've learned the best possible way to help others become enlightened is by asking them to picture "nothing"... people that picture a false "nothing" that still has laws and principles typically fail to grasp the depth of thought we are at. Only a person that has the capacity to picture an absolute "nothing" can typically wrap their minds around all the things that have to exist in order for us to exist.And that chemical reaction responds according to blueprints.
Heh. That's funny. So funny I'm not going to report it for flaming.No offense but the concept is beyond your intellectual capabilities.
Is this supposed to be news? I wouldn't particularly take issue with Ionnidis, even though he's probablyoverstating his case somewhat.
On the other hand, according to his own "theory" his "theory" is probably wrong anyway. LOL at the irony. Or do you think he's correct because his ideas give you an excuse to say science is wrong.
I can see that you've got no rational argument against these findings apart from the magical creationist canards "supposition" and "science is sometimes wrong".
I'll tell you what, let us know your explanation for the diversity of life on Earth, from the oldest fossils to the flora and fauna we see today and I'll weigh it up and see if it offers more explanatory power than the TOE.
I can read about scientific findings myself and evaluate whether they make sense. The fact that the findings of so many areas of scientific research concur. The fact that there is no opposition to the idea of common descent within the scientific community.
I don't think people who've spent their lives studying in the many fields that deal with the topic are stupid / dishonest.
The fact that those with a vested interest in challenging the Theory of Evolution (Creationist propaganda groups etc) have been shown to be downright wrong, resort to dishonest arguments, cannot follow the scientific method and can offer no scientic challenge or better explanation.
If you're going to copy and paste from Creationist websites please cite your sources
Maybe 70 years ago that was correct, I wouldn't know because, like you, I've got no way of fact checking.
The information I posted regarding equidae fossils was accurate and up to date. I notice you dodged my question.
So I repeat....
Maybe you've got a more "logical" hypothesis as to why we see thousand of fossils that represent a gradual change from a little dog-like little creature to the horses we see today?
Anyway, have there been any discoveries since the 1950s that do show intermediate fossils between the two species?
You tell me, you're the giraffe expert.
Descent with modification would explain it would it not?
It's not supposed to be proof, but it's been observed, and what makes you think that the explanation is based on limited evidence?
I wonder if you've read Simpson's book? Why do find him to be a reliable source?
Is that the sound of goal posts being moved? Who mentioned condylarths?
Do you know what else he wrote in the very same book?
Little gems like “The story of the horse family provides one of the best means for studying the how and why of evolution."
Maybe you can read about the research and point out the flaws in their methodolgies, I'm sure they'd be very grateful....
https://www.researchgate.net/public...olutionary_change_in_a_migratory_bird_species
Selective pressure is any phenomena which alters the behavior and fitness of living organisms within a given environment. It is the driving force of evolution and natural selection, and it can be divided into two types of pressure: biotic or abiotic.
I think popular press news articles are not the best source for that sort of information.
Really? 1960? 1951?
That's true.That doesn't make all statement about Jesus logical.
iam trying to prove to a friend that the christian way is the true way but he tells me to give an explanation of evolution and dinosaurs.
any things i could say to prove him wrong?
love
camila smith <3
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?