the science of faith.

[gseeker]

I used the divine power of God as an example because you had used God as an example before, saying that it was just a matter of how we interpreted the evidence. It can't be applied to modern medicine, because if it's placebo then it isn't medicine.

So my belief in the existence of Russia is just the same as belief in the existence of God, ghosts or unicorns? I would say that it's a completely different kind of belief, one that can be backed up by evidence. Once again, I could look at the evidence for evolution, but there's no scientific evidence for God that I could look at. If I do become a biologist and I personally see the evidence for speciation, can I then say that I accept evolution because it is a fact, and not because of "faith"?

At that point you can claim you accept it on fact but it remains your fact and no one else's. Even facts have to be accepted on faith for those who don't have the current ability to prove a fact. In this life even facts are relative. Faith is never relative but is a must. To deny faith is to deny ones own existence.

 

[Tonix]

First you are forgetting several important issues. One you don't know what God I believe in. Rather my interpretation of who God is is important. Two you don't know what my personality is and what kind of God I would connect with. If God is a wrathful God who am I to judge God? If God made me in him image no wonder for the past 6 years I spent as a bouncer that I enjoyed smashing peoples faces off of brick walls. You payed way to much credit to the Christian part than you did the antisocial part of my title. Finally to accept that God exists is independent belief even if you don't like that God. I can believe in God but still resent him for giving me life.

As a Christian, don't you you believe in yahweh and Jesus by sheer virtue of the name? If you resent god, do you really believe in him?

 

[painted wolf]

At that point you can claim you accept it on fact but it remains your fact and no one else's. Even facts have to be accepted on faith for those who don't have the current ability to prove a fact. In this life even facts are relative. Faith is never relative but is a must. To deny faith is to deny ones own existence.

Doesn't this render the Bible pointless.

If the Bible is the word of God... but all facts are improvable then the Bible is useless as a record of God's intent. It's all someone else's "facts" and since "facts" are unreliable it's thus unusable in determination of truth.

Why use the Bible at all?

wa:do

 

[gseeker]

As a Christian, don't you you believe in yahweh and Jesus by sheer virtue of the name? If you resent god, do you really believe in him?

If I resented you wouldn't I have to believe you existed? And no, I believe in God for my own reason and I believe in Jesus because of historical evidence and fact. Everything else I question. I've heard of healing yet I still hurt, the old manuscripts have so many errors as to be untrustworthy, the church is judgemental and classify everything not listed in the Bible as a sin idolatry so they can make it a sin. I can't stand or trust most people to the point that when I sit in public I have to do so with my back to the wall. You cannot know me because I do not know myself.

 

[gseeker]

Doesn't this render the Bible pointless.

If the Bible is the word of God... but all facts are improvable then the Bible is useless as a record of God's intent. It's all someone else's "facts" and since "facts" are unreliable it's thus unusable in determination of truth.

Why use the Bible at all?

wa:do

LOL I never said the Bible had a point sir, you just assumed that since I believe in creation. If anything at least the Bible says it has to be accepted on faith.

 

[waitasec]

At that point you can claim you accept it on fact but it remains your fact and no one else's. Even facts have to be accepted on faith for those who don't have the current ability to prove a fact. In this life even facts are relative. Faith is never relative but is a must. To deny faith is to deny ones own existence.

huh?
i know i am alive...

 

[waitasec]

LOL I never said the Bible had a point sir, you just assumed that since I believe in creation. If anything at least the Bible says it has to be accepted on faith.

as the literal truth or a way for which people explained earthquakes, volcanoes and diseases, well, things that they were ignorant of?

do you think that if those who were a part of the composition of the bible had the knowledge of the cosmos and the micro world and biology we have today, would the bible be different, and if so..in what way?

 

[outhouse]

Im still waiting for him to show that paleontology says the earth is only 6000 years old.


you do know this is next, that and the footprints of man and dinos at the same time



tick tock

 

[painted wolf]

LOL I never said the Bible had a point sir, you just assumed that since I believe in creation. If anything at least the Bible says it has to be accepted on faith.

So the Bible doesn't have a point? Very interesting coming from a professed Christian.

Just to clear up a couple of things...

1) I'm a theist, so in my own way I also believe in "creation"... however, I don't believe in creationism or ID as I have learned enough about Biology to understand how flawed their arguments are.

2) I am a Mrs. not a Sr. There is an icon for avoiding such mistakes at the top of everyone's posts. A very minor point, but best to clear these things up early.

wa:do

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

2) I am a Mrs. not a Sr. There is an icon for avoiding such mistakes ...

And few are as iconic as you.

 

[painted wolf]

And few are as iconic as you.

My age must be showing. :cover:

wa:do

 

[gseeker]

huh?
i know i am alive...

Are you sure you are alive? The evidence you have and your sense of awareness points to you being alive but of course you might be misinterpreting the evidence that you have available. You could be a biological machine with simply the programed assumption of independent thought and control. Or you could just be a figment of my own mind and I'm self consciously giving that figment the words I'm seeing respond to me. That's not what I believe but I could because the evidence is limited and by itself without faith is impossible to accept as a simple fact because facts are never simple.

 

[gseeker]

as the literal truth or a way for which people explained earthquakes, volcanoes and diseases, well, things that they were ignorant of?

do you think that if those who were a part of the composition of the bible had the knowledge of the cosmos and the micro world and biology we have today, would the bible be different, and if so..in what way?

That depends, are you saying truth can be just a relative concept? If so then evolution would be a relative concept too even if it is "truth".

 

[gseeker]

So the Bible doesn't have a point? Very interesting coming from a professed Christian.

Just to clear up a couple of things...

1) I'm a theist, so in my own way I also believe in "creation"... however, I don't believe in creationism or ID as I have learned enough about Biology to understand how flawed their arguments are.

2) I am a Mrs. not a Sr. There is an icon for avoiding such mistakes at the top of everyone's posts. A very minor point, but best to clear these things up early.

wa:do

My apology, I've always considered the wolf to be more of a male totem or avatar and your writing prose is very dominant and forceful so I made an assumption. I am very new to this site and am not yet used to looking up certain information on the debaters on this site. Sorry ma'am.

 

[painted wolf]

My apology, I've always considered the wolf to be more of a male totem or avatar and your writing prose is very dominant and forceful so I made an assumption. I am very new to this site and am not yet used to looking up certain information on the debaters on this site. Sorry ma'am.

No worries.

I'm in a field (or was and hopefully will be again soon) where I have to be able to hold my own in sometimes heated debates with male colleagues. Not being subordinate comes with the territory, though I do try not to be too forceful here. Some posts are better than others.

I'd be interested in discussing paleontology with you... though I'd hate to derail this thread with it, I'm always curious how creationists approach the fossil record. Would you be interested in talking with me about it if I started a thread on the subject?

wa:do

 

[gseeker]

No worries.

I'm in a field (or was and hopefully will be again soon) where I have to be able to hold my own in sometimes heated debates with male colleagues. Not being subordinate comes with the territory, though I do try not to be too forceful here. Some posts are better than others.

I'd be interested in discussing paleontology with you... though I'd hate to derail this thread with it, I'm always curious how creationists approach the fossil record. Would you be interested in talking with me about it if I started a thread on the subject?

wa:do

I would enjoy that. Two points I want to make ahead of time though. One my study in geology is a general study and not specific to paleontology, I've always leaned more in the direction of mineralogy and mining engineering, coming up with economical and ecologically safe ways to mine as well as repairing old damage done by prior mining activity. I do have some paleontology studies but again that is because it was mandatory. Two I wouldn't say that I am a creationist as such just that no solid answer can be ascertained with what evidence and with the limited intelligence mankind posseses. I'm not being critical of individual intelligence just that for use to truly and completely understand existence would be way beyond humankinds ability to reason within the intellectual ability we currently posses.

 

[painted wolf]

I would enjoy that. Two points I want to make ahead of time though. One my study in geology is a general study and not specific to paleontology, I've always leaned more in the direction of mineralogy and mining engineering, coming up with economical and ecologically safe ways to mine as well as repairing old damage done by prior mining activity. I do have some paleontology studies but again that is because it was mandatory. Two I wouldn't say that I am a creationist as such just that no solid answer can be ascertained with what evidence and with the limited intelligence mankind posseses. I'm not being critical of individual intelligence just that for use to truly and completely understand existence would be way beyond humankinds ability to reason within the intellectual ability we currently posses.

That's cool... my study of paleontology is more from an morphological-evolutionary standpoint and my knowledge of geology is pretty general. So we will be approaching the subject from slightly different directions... perhaps we can meet in the middle somewhere.

While I agree we can never know with 100% certainty, I do think we can develop a reasonable approximation of reality.

Unfortunately it's late and I'll have to start the thread tomorrow, if I'm going to give it any justice. I'll post a link here when it's ready.

wa:do

 

[waitasec]

That depends, are you saying truth can be just a relative concept? If so then evolution would be a relative concept too even if it is "truth".

well we know what causes an earthquake...that is a truth
we also know where diseases come from...that is truth..enough truth for you and i to swallow a pill our doctor prescribed for us.
we know the earth is a sphere and not flat. we know that we are not in the center of the universe and we know how infinitely small we are compared to the rest of the universe...these are truths too..
we know building a tower into the heavens will only cause one to get altitude sickness and would be more of a bummer than a haughty act.
we also know more about the moment of death then we did from just 50 yrs ago...
we know our brain waves stop at the moment of death...
we know there is a specific brain activity when one prays, but that activity stops once the brain is dead...these are truths.
evolution is a fact so there is truth to the fact of evolution as there is truth to the theory of gravity.
Evolution is Not Just a Theory: home

so again, considering all this knowledge we now have, do you think the bible would be different? like the idea of sacrifice or using a scapegoat...

 

[painted wolf]

here you go: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...r-pws-paleontology-fun-times.html#post3007115

wa:do

 

[waitasec]

Are you sure you are alive?

ok...i'll play that game.
i don't know....do you?