And so do I. I just don't see how you can separate grace, faith, and works. It's not that works saves you. It's that works are the evidence of the grace and faith.
For The Sake Of Truth
- Thread starter ananomyx
- Start date
And so do I. I just don't see how you can separate grace, faith, and works. It's not that works saves you. It's that works are the evidence of the grace and faith.
Hedshaker
New member
I don't know what caused the universe nor does anyone at this time. Sure some people claim their God-did-it but that doesn't explain how it was done or where God came from. It just moves the question back a stage and replaces a difficult problem with an even greater conundrum. And if that wasn't enough it introduces the supernatural and magic concepts into the equation, which cannot be falsified or tested in any way. Faith doesn't really help much either since it can be used to answer any question. The search for genuine answers ends where faith begins, IMO.
The scientific method on the other hand looks way more promising, especially given that science is still in its infancy compared to say, theology, religion, ancient myths etc.....
....philosophy is ok as a starting point but really needs to be grounded at some point in sound, testable evidence and reason.
It's honest to admit ignorance regarding what is truly unknown but I suspect the hard questions and deeper meaning behind reality, life and everything is probably far stranger than any ones cherished beliefs.
Besides, the natural world is already so very wondrous, who needs magic? I would rather a millisecond of real truth than a whole universe full of fake beliefs. But that's just me
Regards.
Yes truth is what we must seek, and this must be based on what makes sense when we take into consideration all aspects of reality, not just the scientific ones, since there are some questions that cant be answered through science, but can be answered by logic and reason.I don't know what caused the universe nor does anyone at this time. Sure some people claim their God-did-it but that doesn't explain how it was done or where God came from. It just moves the question back a stage and replaces a difficult problem with an even greater conundrum. And if that wasn't enough it introduces the supernatural and magic concepts into the equation, which cannot be falsified or tested in any way. Faith doesn't really help much either since it can be used to answer any question. The search for genuine answers ends where faith begins, IMO.
The scientific method on the other hand looks way more promising, especially given that science is still in its infancy compared to say, theology, religion, ancient myths etc.....
....philosophy is ok as a starting point but really needs to be grounded at some point in sound, testable evidence and reason.
It's honest to admit ignorance regarding what is truly unknown but I suspect the hard questions and deeper meaning behind reality, life and everything is probably far stranger than any ones cherished beliefs.
Besides, the natural world is already so very wondrous, who needs magic? I would rather a millisecond of real truth than a whole universe full of fake beliefs. But that's just me
Regards.
Hedshaker
New member
Logic, reason and evidence!
"What makes sense" is a bit subjective for a genuine "Truth" search since human intuition has been shown to be unreliable. If we put intuition or "what makes sense" before sound, testable evidence then the Sun would still orbit the Earth eg, and believe it or not there are some geocentrists on this board who put cherished beliefs above all else.
Therefore, both logic and reason need at some point to be grounded with testable evidence otherwise they can be manipulated to point where we want them to. Not all logic and reason(s) are equal. And of course, the more extraordinary the claims the more extraordinary should be the evidence. That's logical and reasonable, isn't it?
Also I would put critical thinking and open minded scepticism high on the list where seeking truth is concerned, both of which are at the very heart of the scientific method btw. Have you ever thought of doing a critical examination of Christianity? Of its origins etc? By which I don't mean reading apologetics sites. If not why not? If it genuinely reflects reality then what could possibly be the harm?
To my mind truth seeking isn't about starting with profound beliefs and then torturing the evidence to fit (apologetics). Truth is not found by force fitting reality to religious beliefs and there are a lot of mutually exclusive religious belief systems out there, are there not? They can't all be right but they sure as the Pope is Catholic all be wrong.
And btw, as much as I love science I don't put it on a pedestal to the exclusion of all else. Science is far from perfect. It is often messy and sometimes plain wrong at first. But for all that it just happens to be the most successful endeavour in human history. People are way more likely to survive cancer now than they were only 40 years ago and you can be sure the pastors and the priests and the witch doctors had little to do with it.
Logic, reason and evidence!
"What makes sense" is a bit subjective for a genuine "Truth" search since human intuition has been shown to be unreliable. If we put intuition or "what makes sense" before sound, testable evidence then the Sun would still orbit the Earth eg, and believe it or not there are some geocentrists on this board who put cherished beliefs above all else.
Therefore, both logic and reason need at some point to be grounded with testable evidence otherwise they can be manipulated to point where we want them to. Not all logic and reason(s) are equal. And of course, the more extraordinary the claims the more extraordinary should be the evidence. That's logical and reasonable, isn't it?
Also I would put critical thinking and open minded scepticism high on the list where seeking truth is concerned, both of which are at the very heart of the scientific method btw. Have you ever thought of doing a critical examination of Christianity? Of its origins etc? By which I don't mean reading apologetics sites. If not why not? If it genuinely reflects reality then what could possibly be the harm?
To my mind truth seeking isn't about starting with profound beliefs and then torturing the evidence to fit (apologetics). Truth is not found by force fitting reality to religious beliefs and there are a lot of mutually exclusive religious belief systems out there, are there not? They can't all be right but they sure as the Pope is Catholic all be wrong.
And btw, as much as I love science I don't put it on a pedestal to the exclusion of all else. Science is far from perfect. It is often messy and sometimes plain wrong at first. But for all that it just happens to be the most successful endeavour in human history. People are way more likely to survive cancer now than they were only 40 years ago and you can be sure the pastors and the priests and the witch doctors had little to do with it.
Logic and reason must always be backed with evidence and again you say the more extraordinary a claim the more evidence it requires, a worldview devoid of a Mind doesnt make sense. Life coming from non life isnt a logical conclusion I can draw from the evidence surrounding me. The very idea of being able to know and individually aquire information and knowledge cannot arise from millions and millions of years of non life mixing with non life. Life cannot be created, and even if a scientist could create life it would only prove the point that mind creates mind. And yes, a critical examination of the Christian religion is exactly why I became a believer.
Hedshaker
New member
And where do you think this disembodied mind came from exactly? A mind that has presumably always existed (Whatever always or eternity means in this scenario)? A disembodied mind that requires no energy to sustain and drive it, that is without objective substance and leaves no trace of testable evidence for its existence, yet is capable of somehow creating a vast universe and all the natural laws that govern it....... this makes sense to you somehow? And you say you gave up rational scepticism to believe this stuff? Really?? I don't wish to strawman you but this sounds like unadulterated supernatural, Alice in Wonderland style, magic to me. But then again not all atheists are sceptics I guess I've met ones that believe in ghosts and homoeopathy so if you say you came from atheism then I must give you benefit of the doubt.
And here again you base your deep understanding of reality on your intuition, or what makes sense to you. Maybe a little surface scratch delve into quantum physics might help you get a better grasp of the situation. An understanding of the deeper side of reality far surpasses what makes sense to us. We are intellectually but an advance species of ape on a tiny blue speck orbiting a less than average Sun in a nothing-out-of-the- ordinary solar system in an unimaginably vast universe, with brains made of meat. Fortunately we are in the process of outgrowing our superstitious history and developing a method for taking a closer look at what is really going on, and I have to say it's very exciting.
A word of advice if I may. If your aim is to defend your faith to atheists with logic and reason you should be aware that the approach you espouse is nothing new to seasoned sceptics. Your basic premises are based on a form of "presuppositional apologetics" which is a tad insulting to thinking atheists. No one believes that nothing created everything or that the existence of the universe is evidence for a God. Type it into youtube and watch some of the intellectual debates on the subject. Hope that helps?
Edit to add: And of course, since there is life now, it must have emerged from none-life at some point, whether it developed and progressed naturally or was poofed magically by some mythical entity.
Since you appear not to be taking the same effort as I this may be a good time to end the exchange.
All the best.
Cheers.
Last edited:
that is reasonable
lol does this make more sense to you...?https://youtu.be/v34QjYPuiEA
Again either the universe created itself, or a mind did. Either the universe is eternal, or there is something outside of it which created it. Which makes more sense. Simple as that. Has science observed life coming from non life... nope. Have we figured out statistics regarding a universe popping into existence from infinite density and forming laws which govern it precisely? Yep, and not probable. And chance doesn't even give infinite density a choice to do anything. Chance is just the probability of something happening, it doesnt explain how or why it came to be. SCIENCE points us to an intelligence, not to an eternal universe that just decided to expand, because even then God becomes an impersonal, unintelligible force. Again its what makes more sense, if you want to believe in an eternal universe that somehow can create itself (though its a contradiction for a thing can not be before it is) then I tip my hat to you. If you think the information that is within everything is just a product of impersonal forces, you have way more faith than me. Good Day
Hedshaker
New member
Yet again, as with my previous posts, you haven't addressed a single one of my points. And you say you should give honest answers to non believers?
I think the answer to that is plain for all to see......
If you cannot answer you should have the honesty to admit it
how do you address someone who doesn't have a reasonable explanation?
they are unreasonable
Hedshaker
New member
Then please answer the questions previously asked of you. Who or what created your God (always existed is not an answer. If something can always exist then why not the universe?) How did your God go about creating a universe? Was it magic?
Then please point us to the peer reviewed scientific paper that claims "SCIENCE points us to an intelligence".
There is a big difference between real science and your cherished beliefs,
not to an eternal universe that just decided to expand, because even then God becomes an impersonal, unintelligible force. Again its what makes more sense, if you want to believe in an eternal universe that somehow can create itself (though its a contradiction for a thing can not be before it is) then I tip my hat to you. If you think the information that is within everything is just a product of impersonal forces, you have way more faith than me. Good Day
Are you familiar with a logical fallacy called..... "Strawman Fallacy"
"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent"
I don't know about giving answers "For The Sake Of Truth". There isn't much "Truth" in logical fallacies, is there? Beating your own strawman of what you claim your opponents say is just rank poor. Maybe apologetics just isn't your thing.
Hedshaker
New member
What would you know about reasonable? To you reasonable doesn't exist outside of your beliefs.
Hedshaker
New member
What a dreadfully dishonest and edited video. If that sort of dishonesty appeals to you then that clears things up.
No wonder!
CherubRam
New member
Dark Matter is undifferentiated material which has no atomic bonds, this would make it of no particular substance. In other words, it is Nothing. And if you are willing to accept it, it is primordial, and God's store house for creating the universe from "Nothing."
sensible, rational, logical,
Hedshaker
New member
How about magical? How sensible, rational, logical, is supernatural magic?
popsthebuilder
New member
Just because GOD is the Creator of all and as such the beginning and end of existence as we know it doesn't mean it had a beginning. It is our beginning and end. I totally agree with everything else I have read of yours on this thread.
Peace.
Hedshaker
New member
Nothing sensible, rational, logical, about the universe being magically poofed by an invisible entity.
If not magic then how was it done?