spiritual science

[Electric Sceptic]

Blabbing on about nothing again are we? The way that we determine old ages, and scenarios of the past are through things like light speed, decay, evolutionary presumptions, tectonic present plate movements, and rates, etc etc etc. All based on the present physical only, and assumed into the past. If you must post, try saying something.

I'll ignore your little ad hominems and just say that again, you demonstrate here that you know nothing about science. All of the things you mention are at the heart of science; you merely want them abandonded when what they yield conflicts with your religious beliefs.

 

[Grengor]

Dad, you're "outside the box" thinking may very well be correct. Here's the problem though, we will never be able to find out(while we're alive at least) if you are correct or not. That's the whole thing, there's no way for anyone to know. That's what I was trying to demonstrate. As soon as we think "outside the box", anything goes.

 

[dad]

I'll ignore your little ad hominems and just say that again, you demonstrate here that you know nothing about science. All of the things you mention are at the heart of science; you merely want them abandonded when what they yield conflicts with your religious beliefs.

The things I mentioned I don't want abandoned. It's nice to know how fast the plates move, and light travels, etc! No problem at all! That is good science. But if you want to say that the same processes, and physical only applied to the past, and will to the future, you step soundly away from science into just belief! This is what I mean by science falsely so called! And you are welcome to your beliefs, but don't come near our children with them, and expect to have us pay for it! we have beliefs of our own.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

The things I mentioned I don't want abandoned. It's nice to know how fast the plates move, and light travels, etc! No problem at all! That is good science. But if you want to say that the same processes, and physical only applied to the past, and will to the future, you step soundly away from science into just belief! This is what I mean by science falsely so called! And you are welcome to your beliefs, but don't come near our children with them, and expect to have us pay for it! we have beliefs of our own.

As I said, you want them - and science itself - abandoned as soon as it contradicts your religious beliefs. Science might be what you mean by 'science falsely so called', but you can't demonstrate that it is 'falsely so called'.

Fortunately, authorities exist to ensure that your children get educated despite your religion-inspired desire to throw away science when it suits you.

 

[dad]

Dad, you're "outside the box" thinking may very well be correct. Here's the problem though, we will never be able to find out(while we're alive at least) if you are correct or not. That's the whole thing, there's no way for anyone to know. That's what I was trying to demonstrate. As soon as we think "outside the box", anything goes.

Well, the same can be said of granny or the speck, etc. We need to stick to science here. Physical only belief and speculation is not science. So then, it depends on who the "we" are!
Believers can look to the bible, and prayer, as well as to science, to see if these things be so or not. Does the bible tell of anywhere the spiritual and physical were combined? If so, what was it like, how did it operate? Was Jesus' ressurected body both spiritual and physical? Yes. What was it like? It had properties of both. It was eternal. Was Adam eternal? Many think the bible indicates he was meant to be originally, and started to die when he sinned. How could he have been eternal if he,a nd the universe were physical only? Impossible. How could trees grow to fruition in a few days in a physical only world? Impossible. And so on, including the flood. This is why many have abandoned it as impossible, and great pains went to, to come up with compromise theories! The clues are in, and we can know, I contend, if we are a bible believer. --If not, then you have only your belief in only the physical, and indeed cannot know.

 

[Electric Sceptic]

Well, the same can be said of granny or the speck

What granny? I believe in my granny. I saw here a couple of weeks ago. What speck?

We need to stick to science here. Physical only belief and speculation is not science.

Yes, we need to stick to science. First, you need to learn what science is.

Believers can look to the bible, and prayer, as well as to science, to see if these things be so or not.

You mean 'believers in what *I* believe."

 

[dad]

As I said, you want them - and science itself - abandoned as soon as it contradicts your religious beliefs. Science might be what you mean by 'science falsely so called', but you can't demonstrate that it is 'falsely so called'.

Fortunately, authorities exist to ensure that your children get educated despite your religion-inspired desire to throw away science when it suits you.

No one said christians didn't want their , or other children to be educated! What a cheap smear. Says a lot about you. No one wants to throw science away I heard of yet either. But the so called science, that claims to tell us the creator did not make the world, because they believe that only the physical existed in God's yesterday or tommorow, we need to beware of. No one has a right to force their belief on others. God doesn't force us at all, He is like a dove, that is easily shooed away if we don't want Him. Normally. When a body, or a nation gets so far out of line it endangers His plan for man, why, then, He'll lower the boom. You really don't want to be found fighting against the Almighty!
So, remember, what I call so called science is not real science, that operates in it's proper little sphere, or box. But it is only when it leaves there, and proclaims that is all there ever was or will be, by virtue of nothing but belief! That is when it becomes science falsely so called!

 

[Tenka]

Your reality of the physical only needs more than a stetch, just to scratch a worms ankle!

Worms with ankles?
Oh must have been back when the spiritual was joined to the physical eh?

You must have realised at one point that your myths were so far removed from reality that no "interpretation" of evidence could give them any credibility, however acknowledging them as allegory or outright myth left your beliefs being a tad too ordinary, too usual.
Therefore the invention of a spiritual world that could be mixed with reality lets you say that anything was possible at such a time.

Why even bother?
Why not just say Goddidit? same magic answer, less minced words.

I seriously hope this is all just a silly, twisted joke that you've taken way too far for way too long.

 

[ebia]

The things I mentioned I don't want abandoned. It's nice to know how fast the plates move, and light travels, etc! No problem at all! That is good science. But if you want to say that the same processes, and physical only applied to the past, and will to the future, you step soundly away from science into just belief!

You better not get on an aeroplane then. The science that say's it will stay in the air today might stop working around 2 oclock tomorrow.

Science is founded on the assumption that things behave consistantly in different places and different times. Without that assumption, science can't do anything.

 

[dad]

Worms with ankles?
Oh must have been back when the spiritual was joined to the physical eh?
[Well, I was trying to say more that they couldn't reach very high, rather than some worm research attempt, actually! I guess centipede then would be a better word for your sensibilities. Oh, many people do think that snakes were different back then, I have heard. What, being way up a tree, and talking, and all. I have heard some say they think snakes used to be able to fly even, and going on their belly was only a part of the curse.]

You must have realised at one point that your myths were so far removed from reality that no "interpretation" of evidence could give them any credibility,[With the 'reality' here being belief only in the physical, and the 'myths' being God's word!] however acknowledging them as allegory or outright myth left your beliefs being a tad too ordinary, too usual.
Therefore the invention of a spiritual world that could be mixed with reality lets you say that anything was possible at such a time. [So I invented Jesus Christ just to whump you poor evos on this forum, then?]

Why even bother?
Why not just say Goddidit? same magic answer, less minced words.
[Well, God did do it. Nothing wrong with that. When we realize the reasons we thought there was evidence He didn't were really only a belief in only the physical existing in the past or future, the question changes. It has now become some people who claim 'Goddidnotdoit' and have no evidence whatsoever to back it up purely belief, 100%! They ride on the good name of science, and then proceed to try to misapply it to a past it does not apply to, or a future! Science falsely so called for sure. Phoney, deceptive, faith robbing, diabolical, and hidden in the grass of real science, where it freely can strike it's unsuspecting little victims time and again, till they succumb to the poison! All this, and it is largely the believers who have to pay for this morbid endeavor!]

I seriously hope this is all just a silly, twisted joke that you've taken way too far for way too long.
[Not just hope, but seriously hope. That tells me these things have had some impact]

.

 

[Freodin]

A question, dad.

How do you test competing hypothesises in spiritual science?

 

[Grengor]

THAT'S what I was trying to say, couldn't quite get it out though.

 

[platzapS]

Blabbing on about nothing again are we? The way that we determine old ages, and scenarios of the past are through things like light speed, decay, evolutionary presumptions, tectonic present plate movements, and rates, etc etc etc. All based on the present physical only, and assumed into the past. If you must post, try saying something

GAH!
It's impossible to refute dad, because any scientific evidence we give can be automatically turned away as "physical only" science. Dad has quite a frustrating and clever strategy.

 

[meebs]

A question, dad.

How do you test competing hypothesises in spiritual science?

GAAARGH! you beat me!

I was going to say, if what dad is saying is true...then there are places we can start trying to test his theories, such as a Benny Hinn or other faith healing conferance, where people claim they are healed of all sort of illnesses and diseases and genetic disorders. ( i havent heard of any medical evidence yet!) Clearly thats a case of the spiritual beating the physical, of which i am sceptical, hence why i want to test the theory.

Problem: How do you test the spiritual? (where freodin beat me to it! )

Any body got any theories and make a hypothesis?

 

[Freodin]

GAAARGH! you beat me!

I was going to say, if what dad is saying is true...then there are places we can start trying to test his theories, such as a Benny Hinn or other faith healing conferance, where people claim they are healed of all sort of illnesses and diseases and genetic disorders. ( i havent heard of any medical evidence yet!) Clearly thats a case of the spiritual beating the physical, of which i am sceptical, hence why i want to test the theory.

Problem: How do you test the spiritual? (where freodin beat me to it! )

Any body got any theories and make a hypothesis?

I was aiming at something rather different.

Dad claims that we cannot make any statements about past events based on "physical only" science.

But how does he make any statements about past events based on his "spiritual science"?

In one of his posts (go hunt for it if you don´t believe me) he asserted that "spiritual science" does not only allow for a water canopy, but makes its existence almost certain.

Well, what if I now counter this "spiritual hypothesis" with a hypothesis of "There was no water canopy - the water for the flood was created ex nihilo in the atmosphere to rain down."

Is there anything that we could do to find out whether his hypothesis was better than mine?

 

[dad]

A question, dad.

How do you test competing hypothesises in spiritual science?

Well, answer me this, how many others have you heard so far?

 

[meebs]

I was aiming at something rather different.

Dad claims that we cannot make any statements about past events based on "physical only" science.

But how does he make any statements about past events based on his "spiritual science"?

In one of his posts (go hunt for it if you don´t believe me) he asserted that "spiritual science" does not only allow for a water canopy, but makes its existence almost certain.

Well, what if I now counter this "spiritual hypothesis" with a hypothesis of "There was no water canopy - the water for the flood was created ex nihilo in the atmosphere to rain down."

Is there anything that we could do to find out whether his hypothesis was better than mine?

Try to find any evidence of the existance that in the past such a canopy existed? One would be to look at past records of such phenomena, (anything left over from pre-food?) , look at geological records, look for evidence in the polar ice caps...

Thats the best way i can see to test it, from what i interpret. (I read all the posts but my short term memory is pants!)

Although my question is that - in Eden dad mentions that spiriual science and physical science was combined, but with the fall both were seperated. However people have claimed that physical science has been overcome by (as dad calls it) "spiritual science", most call these miracles. Can we test this today?

(no really, has anyone ever actaully tries to test faith healing conferences?!!)

 

[meebs]

dad - do you claim that the canopy exists still?

From evidence we have recieved so far such a canopy does not exist. ( Satillite footage etc).

from jellybean who is on a wild train of thought...

 

[nvxplorer]

Does spiritual science allow time travel, dad?

 

[dad]

GAAARGH! you beat me!

I was going to say, if what dad is saying is true...then there are places we can start trying to test his theories, such as a Benny Hinn or other faith healing conferance, where people claim they are healed of all sort of illnesses and diseases and genetic disorders. [I have nothing against this. I know there are genuine healings, and if any are faked, I have no qualms about slappin any guilty culprits around a little, so to speak. Who knows, you just might find a few real gems? ] ( i havent heard of any medical evidence yet!) Clearly thats a case of the spiritual beating the physical, of which i am sceptical, hence why i want to test the theory.
[Aimee Semple McPherson had em lined up by the thousands outside packed stadiums, just to touch the stadium wall, so many were getting healed!]

Problem: How do you test the spiritual? (where freodin beat me to it! )

Any body got any theories and make a hypothesis?
[Well, most things are out of your reach at the time being. But many have tried salvation, and claimed a major change in their lives. Many have prayed, and gotten answers. 'Seek, and ye shall find'. -(God). Many have returned from the dead to tell about what they saw, supervised by doctors. Many have dreamed of, or even had visions of relatives who have died, but were alive and well in the spirit world. One of the first things that people see after dying, is a loved one, God sends, to come and greet them! Then there is the eyewitness testimony of Jesus who rose from the dead, by His friends. There are so many evidences. Not to forget the non christian world as well, which also is full of them. Houdini even had one! He heard his mother guide him to the hole in the ice, when he got into trouble in a trick once. He sought out spiritualists after that, knowing there was something to it, but ended up exposing many, who were cheap tricksters out for a buck as a result. There is much to be considered, and science can't help us on this really, at all. Except to provide doubt.]

.