- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,210
- 52,660
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Why do people like you refuse to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?
Upvote
0
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.
Why do people like you refuse to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?Not really. Many Christians and non-Christians agree with me on this. Their is overwhelming evidence of this. But you seem to be a person who redefines evidence whenever it suits you. Why is that? Why do people like you do this?
Certainly. From a pantheistic viewpoint it is practically obligatory. (An pantheist is, from the viewpoint of Christian theology, an atheist.)Any atheists here want to agree with this statement?
As far as I can determine his beliefs as far as they relate to science are consistent with science, so there is no need to investigate them. His spiritual beliefs fall outside the purview of scientific investigation, in the context of this thread.Any atheists here want to challenge this guy's beliefs with your scientific method?
Application of the scientific method supports the observation that, quite often, you don't think.I didn't think so.
Because we are not insane. If an event leaves no evidence then it has had zero impact upon its environment which means it cannot actually be an event.Why do people like you refuse to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?
Demonstrate your claimed dependency, in a core field of science like Physics, (seeing as your claim is a generalised one, covering all of science) .. As opposed to just waxing lyrical(ly) about it then.
There are no presumptions implying the existence of some truth, in the well published and widely taught scientific method. You have been caught out by that simple fact.
Interpretative frameworks are not science .. Interpretations are based on Philosophically posited (untestable) truths and there are various interpretative frameworks known, none of which ultimately impact any of science's results.
I'll give an example; all of science is based on operational definitions which are objectively testable. There are no exceptions to this. Show me the objective test which unequivocally leads to the conclusion that some 'independent reality' exists 'out there' (independently from our minds) .. and then I might pay your claim about science relying on say, Philosophical Realism some attention .. Good luck with doing that!
I didn't think so.
Thanks for the QED.Certainly. From a pantheistic viewpoint it is practically obligatory. (An pantheist is, from the viewpoint of Christian theology, an atheist.)
As far as I can determine his beliefs as far as they relate to science are consistent with science, so there is no need to investigate them. His spiritual beliefs fall outside the purview of scientific investigation, in the context of this thread.
Application of the scientific method supports the observation that, quite often, you don't think.
Then you must have a college education?Because we are not insane.
Awww ... you mean I gotta do all that, just so I can prevent you guys from refusing to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?You will need to produce meta-analyses that indicate a strong correlation between education level and sanity/insanity.
It is difficult to hold an intelligent conversation with you if you make posts lacking intelligence. Providing support for your implication would merely justify your suggestion that sanity and education are linked. It would have no relationship to belief or non-belief in events lacking evidence. This is typical of the non-sequiturs you so often introduce, seemingly when you realise your arguments lack substance.Awww ... you mean I gotta do all that, just so I can prevent you guys from refusing to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?
Consider your mantra: The Bible Says It, That Settles It. That is as uncooperative as it gets, so get off your high and hypocritical horse with that sort of mud slinging.If you're going to try that hard to be uncooperative, then so be it.
Why do people like you refuse to believe in an event occurring that would leave no evidence?
For who? people educated in the ways of Egypt?* I should agree.Yes, the hiddenness of god is a problem.
Because we are not insane. If an event leaves no evidence then it has had zero impact upon its environment which means it cannot actually be an event.
(There is plenty of evidence for Narnia and yet that does not exist, yet you would have us delude ourselves by believing in something for which their is zero evidence. On your bike.)
You will need to produce meta-analyses that indicate a strong correlation between education level and sanity/insanity. "The Bible Says So" won't work in this context.
The points are written on the wall, but you have to have a light bulb on to see them.Sorry, from thinking about what I just said, I will retract what I said at the beginning, he still doesn't have a point!!!
For who? people educated in the ways of Egypt?* I should agree.
Do you think this word was put in there flippantly?
1 Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
* In Bible types, Egypt is a type of the world.
You're a credit to your education.Quoting scripture gets you nowhere. Modern Christian scholarship to its credit doesn't even consider 1 and 2 Timothy's as one of Paul's original letters (even if a minority of scholars have tried to say it was dictated to a scribe). Keep up to date man, so much of your thinking is so just 19th century.
Even if Paul wrote this, he wouldn't have the qualifications to be an authority on the subject by today's standards. Hence, it would be irrelevant anyway.
The points are written on the wall, but you have to have a light bulb on to see them.
Well, for a Christian mystics as an example, they might put themselves by way of Love into the Heart of Christ and see what they see there from the perspective of Jesus.Into what?
Again all you are Doing is stating your opinion of me. Irrelevant.Not really. Many Christians and non-Christians agree with me on this. Their is overwhelming evidence of this. But you seem to be a person who redefines evidence whenever it suits you. Why is that? Why do people like you do this?
Evolution as an explanation for life is so short-sighted and backwards thinking. We, intelligent beings could possibly create AI's that create. What does that tell you? That we also had an intelligent Creator.However, we can conceive in these terms today. Holding on to very primitive explanations and ideas is like getting caught in some evolutionary cul de
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?