SHEEPEOPLE

[Davian]

Are you willfully ignorant of the basic concepts of pantheism and panentheism, or just being coy? I'm talking about the basic tenets of panentheism at this point. I thought you told me you read that empirical theory of God thread?

I did. You didn't address my question.

 

[Davian]

Seems to work better than evolutionists when they guessed Darwin's Finches were separate species before bothering to study them. Then when they do they find out they all interbreed and produce fertile offspring, yet instead of correcting their mistakes - just keep telling the same old falsified stories - in which their followers also refuse to challenge their high priests of evolution.

You mean, like evangelical Christians such as Geneticist Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, that accept evolutionary theory?

 

[ScottA]

Actually, I tend to agree with LM on this particular point, and it comes right back to the difference between 'scientific evidence' vs. 'empirical evidence'.

"Science", and specifically the scientific method can explore the "supernatural" in terms of it's effect on the physical universe. For instance, the whole concept of dark energy is postulated based upon the presumed effect of said invisible agent upon the process/speed of "space expansion" (another supernatural concept/agent by the way). There is no empirical evidence that "dark energy" has any physical empirical effect on a photon. The whole concept of dark energy is actually a supernatural agent/construct, that is built upon another supernatural agent/construct because "space expansion" has also never been demonstrated to have any net effect on any photon, in any lab.

You "might" be correct that "empirical physics" may be limited to studying the "natural realm", but even the empirical method has some ability to delve into cause/effect relationships in some instances.

If the supernatural agent in question cannot be controlled in experimentation, the empirical method may become limited, but not "science", or the scientific method. "Scientific evidence" isn't technically limited to demonstrated or to demonstrating cause/effect relationships in controlled experiments. If it were, Lambda-CDM could not and would not survive since it's built upon no less than four supernatural agents/constructs, none of which enjoy any cause/effect support in a lab in controlled experimentation.

String theory is another example where theoretical physics meets supernatural agents that include extra spacetime dimensions.

I'd have to agree with LM that science can indeed study supernatural agents based upon their net effect on the natural world.

The danger of course is that such supernatural agents may or may not exist in nature. In other words, like 'dark energy' theory which was built upon a premise that may or may not be true, it too may or may not exist based upon the validity of the original premise, or premises in this case.

Empirical physics allows us to delve into the cause/effect relationships in controlled experimentation. That's an optimal sort of evidence, but it's not a requirement in science, and in some areas of physics it's quite rare. Only 5 percent of current Big Bang theory enjoys empirical cause/effect support in the lab. The vast majority of the theory is based upon supernatural agents, and evidence that is 'scientific' to a degree (but quite dated today), but the cause/effect relationships are all assumed, they are not demonstrated empirically.

"A" for effort for sure, and while much appreciated, it all suggests that the tail (science) can wag the dog (God)...which if we are going to consider truth at all should not be entertained.

 

[joshua 1 9]

How do you know that?

I googled it. Flat earth myth.

 

[dlamberth]

What living universe?

The one you and I are living in.

.

 

[Davian]

I googled it. Flat earth myth.

Is that how that works?

Let me google that for you.

 

[Davian]

The one you and I are living in.

.

Define "life" in a manner that includes both the biology of this planet and a "living" universe.

 

[dlamberth]

Define "life" in a manner that includes both the biology of this planet and a "living" universe.

That's your limited understanding. Mine has to do with a universe that is in constant change and evolving into something different than it was before. The biosphere, which is what your looking at, is not separate and apart from the universe. The universe is in the biosphere. The universe is not separate little parts. It's all whole, united and One. The universe is very much alive and even with it's own form of consciousness complete with birth and death.

.

 

[Davian]

That's your limited understanding. Mine has to do with a universe that is in constant change and evolving into something different than it was before. The biosphere, which is what your looking at, is not separate and apart from the universe. The universe is in the biosphere. The universe is not separate little parts. It's all whole, united and One. The universe is very much alive and even with it's own form of consciousness complete with birth and death.

.

You were using a false equivalency then. Got it.

 

[dlamberth]

You were using a false equivalency then. Got it.

What makes it false? The story of the universe is at each new level an unfolding of life. When we get to the earth, the biosphere was birthed out of rock. Out of the biosphere, consciousness formed. Than self-consciousness comes to be which is when the universe becomes conscious of itself. There's nothing false about a living universe.

.

 

[ScottA]

If a man tells you he has been picked up like a kitten by its mother and carried to safety by God who made himself known to him personally, and it changed his life from hopelessness to hope, from doubt to knowing...you do not have to believe him, and that says something of you. But if a hundred say the same, and then a million, and then a million per generation...and still you don't believe it, then that too, says something about you.

 

[Davian]

What makes it false? The story of the universe is at each new level an unfolding of life. When we get to the earth, the biosphere was birthed out of rock. Out of the biosphere, consciousness formed. Than self-consciousness comes to be which is when the universe becomes conscious of itself. There's nothing false about a living universe.

.

That is not what I said.

 

[Davian]

If a man tells you he has been picked up like a kitten by its mother and carried to safety by God who made himself known to him personally, and it changed his life from hopelessness to hope, from doubt to knowing...you do not have to believe him, and that says something of you. But if a hundred say the same, and then a million, and then a million per generation...and still you don't believe it, then that too, says something about you.

According to a citation on wiki, an estimated 5 to 6 percent of the general population have been abducted by extraterrestrial aliens visiting Earth.

What precautions have you taken to prevent this from happening to you and your family? Nothing? What does this say about you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_abduction

 

[joshua 1 9]

That's your limited understanding. Mine has to do with a universe that is in constant change and evolving into something different than it was before. The biosphere, which is what your looking at, is not separate and apart from the universe. The universe is in the biosphere. The universe is not separate little parts. It's all whole, united and One. The universe is very much alive and even with it's own form of consciousness complete with birth and death.

.

A universe that is forever changing and yet governed my laws that do not change.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You mean, like evangelical Christians such as Geneticist Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project, that accept evolutionary theory?

And this has to do with what, since he too is using those same finches that interbreed and produce fertile offspring and calling them separate species to support his false belief in evolution?

Unlike you I don't base my beliefs on what other Christians believe. Unlike you I can look at the evidence and determine for myself if finches that interbreed and produce fertile offspring are the same species or not. Unlike you I don't need to ignore breed mating with breed producing new breeds and then classify everything in the fossil record as new species, instead of breeds - as per observation of the world around us.

Good strawman, but still doesn't make it anything other than a strawman.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

A universe that is forever changing and yet governed my laws that do not change.

Yes, always changing but still never changing. Always evolving into something new, yet the laws of physics never change to meet these new evolutionary forms. We always hear talk of change - of something new - yet the laws of physics always remain the same. I feel I should clarify - the laws of physics - not peoples belief in theory they think is laws of physics.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

According to a citation on wiki, an estimated 5 to 6 percent of the general population have been abducted by extraterrestrial aliens visiting Earth.

What precautions have you taken to prevent this from happening to you and your family? Nothing? What does this say about you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_abduction

And yet we are not the ones searching for life on other planets - not that we deny the possibility either. So what precautions have "you" taken, since it is those same aliens they blame for changing the genetics of mankind so they can accept mankind's obvious intelligent design and not have to consider God instead?

But since NASA is the leader in this search for ET, shouldn't you be taking precautions yourself?

Or isn't that strawman good for yourself too?

 

[Smidlee]

According to a citation on wiki, an estimated 5 to 6 percent of the general population have been abducted by extraterrestrial aliens visiting Earth.

What precautions have you taken to prevent this from happening to you and your family? Nothing? What does this say about you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_abduction

How many do you think has given their life for that belief?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Is that how that works?

Let me google that for you.

Here, let me Google too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

"Virtually all scholars who write on the subject accept that Jesus existed,"

So we can assume that those others are not informed scholars, since virtually all of those who are informed on the subject believe he existed. So which class do you fall in - the informed scholar class or the uninformed myth class?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Yes, always changing but still never changing. Always evolving into something new, yet the laws of physics never change to meet these new evolutionary forms. We always hear talk of change - of something new - yet the laws of physics always remain the same. I feel I should clarify - the laws of physics - not peoples belief in theory they think is laws of physics.

That is why people are "forever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2tim3:7