• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Faith in Christ is Completely Logical

Robert.Evans

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Shad said:
Theories are practical or theoretical. A theoretical theory is one in which it's prediction have not been tested, fully or partial. So in the case of the Big Crunch this can not be tested outside of a computer simulation. Theoretical theories can be discarded or modified as new date or tests are done. A practical theory is one which has been tested fully. Many theories in physics are theoretical since we can only use mathematical models in computer simulations to test the idea. At time this is due to time limited depending on the theory. For example our theories on star formation and star evolution are restricted by the time it takes for stars to go through this process. We can not observe a star for 5 billion years to prove the theory's predication. So instead the mathematically model is inputted into a computer system and ran. If the math is correct the model will produce a result. If the math is wrong the result will fail. Theoretical theories still have evidence is support just the prediction can not be tested is the same manner as in person real-time experiments.
Click to expand...
Sure.
 
NulliuSINverba

NulliuSINverba

Active Member
Robert.Evans said:
God is only proved to those with open eyes.
Click to expand...

Translation: If you don't believe our bologna, it's because you're not open-minded enough.

The proof is within, it is the ''evidence of things not seen'' which is demonstrated through a theist as faith, their conviction.
Click to expand...

Claims of "internalized proof" are not proof. They are more claims.

Either you accept that or not.
Click to expand...

I readily accept that theists make unsubstantiated claims. It's not even the least bit controversial. That is what they do.

But don't mistake something not existing just because you have not experienced what we have.
Click to expand...

Only if you promise to not mistake existing just because you've experienced what the rest of us have not.

Meanwhile, let us recall that testimony of X is never a reliable indicator that X exists.

See:

Monster, Loch Ness
Objects, Unidentified Flying
Snowman, Abominable
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
NulliuSINverba said:
Translation: If you don't believe our bologna, it's because you're not open-minded enough.



Claims of "internalized proof" are not proof. They are more claims.



I readily accept that theists make unsubstantiated claims. It's not even the least bit controversial. That is what they do.



Only if you promise to not mistake existing just because you've experienced what the rest of us have not.

Meanwhile, let us recall that testimony of X is never a reliable indicator that X exists.

See:

Monster, Loch Ness
Objects, Unidentified Flying
Snowman, Abominable
Click to expand...

Uh... you realize the 'theories' presented by non-theists are unsubstantiated as well. Not every theory is in the same class of likeliness.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
NulliuSINverba said:
Are you saying God is only a theory?
Click to expand...
No, but the theories related to intelligence or intent as cause are presented in a theoretical manner. Because there are, other 'possibilities' of Deity existence that don't necessarily have the 'creation' part of matter involved. Not saying I subscribe to that, but it's part of the debate/discussion.
 
icehorse

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
disciple said:
No, but the theories related to intelligence or intent as cause are presented in a theoretical manner. Because there are, other 'possibilities' of Deity existence that don't necessarily have the 'creation' part of matter involved. Not saying I subscribe to that, but it's part of the debate/discussion.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I allow an ever-so-slight possibility that there is a deity (and an even smaller chance that such a deity is as described by a man made religion).

So, if Jesus returned tomorrow with bomb-proof evidence, I'd change my mind. Regardless, I'll label arguments based on unfalsifiable claims as "silly". (Lucille agrees :) )
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
icehorse said:
FWIW, I allow an ever-so-slight possibility that there is a deity (and an even smaller chance that such a deity is as described by a man made religion).

So, if Jesus returned tomorrow with bomb-proof evidence, I'd change my mind. Regardless, I'll label arguments based on unfalsifiable claims as "silly". (Lucille agrees :) )
Click to expand...
Good for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top