|
Post by blinda on Sept 5, 2009 12:19:24 GMT
A man said to his wife one day, 'I don't know how you can be so stupid and so beautiful all at the same time.'
The wife responded, 'Allow me to explain please, God made me beautiful so you would be attracted to me; God made me stupid so I would be attracted to you!
Have a good weekend y`all!
|
|
|
Post by davidsmith on Oct 16, 2009 18:33:55 GMT
Bel and Lawrence
Bel as you already started a thread here called creation the addition of my post, taken from the 'Hominid' thread, seemed apt.
Lawrence
You wrote
As I have an altered state of understanding these days I have to disagree somewhat. I would just say that FACTS are based on unproven axioms that have been agreed on by enough people of this world that they can make a useful and rational statements that support a system that can explain their environment and the reason for being.
The evolution of changes within a species is quite reasonable and has been experienced. However, I think I'm right in saying that, in higher animals a complete change in species (like a sparrow becomes an chaffinch), let alone genus, class or phylum etc, (like fish become birds) has not been experienced or proved in terms of the scientific method. The only statistical test one could do would be correlative but without empirical evidence there can be no causal relationship established between the data.
Only intuitive reasoning, interpolation and speculation have founded the beliefs you claim to be facts. In terms of the scientific method it may well be reasonable to call these facts. However whether or not they are an absolute truth cannot be established or claimed.
Our God is an absolute and unchanging truth ergo the Word is also that and the one proves the other. This absolute truth cannot be compared to science fact since it is only the experience of the power of the unseen that convinces the unbeliever. Once you know you know and when the Holy Spirit fills your heart (yours personally Lawrence) then you will say OH YEAH! as the blindly obvious is revealed. I pray that it will come to you as it did me. Dave
|
|
|
Post by lawrencebevan on Oct 17, 2009 11:32:13 GMT
oh dear.......
Thus we agree that natural selection occurs? Artificial selection has been able to produce very different phenotypes in many creatures - how different is a miniature poodle from the wolf ancester? Horses and donkeys are two different species that can breed to produce offspring that is a third species - mules. All this has occurred in time spans that are split-seconds in the evolutionary time frame.
Can you give me an explanation for the abscence of mammals in the jurassic period but their appearance in the later periods?
If its alright with you, I ask that you dont pray for me, thankyou but Im happy as I am. :-)
|
|
|
Post by billliggins on Oct 17, 2009 14:59:05 GMT
There is very strong evidence Dave, that at least 2 genus, 'dinosaurs', evolved into birds (I can find the refs. if you wish). Of course, we are talking millenia which was the very point which Darwin (a convinced Christian) was making.
I am no expert in matters of faith, so will leave that to you but understand from friends that science and religious faith are not mutually exclusive.
All the best
Bill
|
|
|
Post by lawrencebevan on Oct 17, 2009 23:11:49 GMT
hi dave
Its beginning to feel like were forming up around you in a very internet forum way! sorry!
Of course we all know how creationists love to point and shout "show us the intermediaries - what about the gaps - the missing links". However there are actually many examples in the fossil record to show "intermediary" species.
I suspect Bill is referring to Archaeopteryx but much of our problems lie in the way we classify species, most later dinosaurs if feathered would be classified as birds, in fact some had feathers. Also have a butcher's at the fossil species Tiktaalik.
The evolution of whales is very well laid out in the fossil history and shows the movement of land mammals back to the sea. Makes you wonder if one day seals will be regarded as an intermediary !
But the fossil record is not required to substatiate natural selection. Comparative anatomy in living creatures, geographical distribution, embryology, DNA all show common origins. Moreover live experimentation with bacterium show this all to easily be possible with : random mutation and non-random selection and zero direction from a higher power. Oh......... and lots of time.
|
|
|
Post by davidsmith on Oct 19, 2009 18:09:22 GMT
Lawrence
Hey I don't mind a bit of ganging up. Complacency would be far worse.
I was more interested in your idea that science is fact and the ultimate truth than trying to debate about how species evolve. Science it just as much a system of belief as you would say God is. The scientific method only show probability not truth. When something has a high probability it comes to be known as a fact, this is not a truth in the sense that it is incontrovertible. The basic axiom of the scientific method is that it must be falsifiable otherwise it becomes metaphysical. This basically means one must be able to test it, ergo it must be able to be experienced by man. Furthermore to become fact it must be experienced and repeatable, these very criteria exclude the possibility of a man, who only believes in science, from accepting God.
In fact science is great for explaining the world of our experience in terms that we can understand. (how and why things work) It cannot of course, by its own criteria, explain the unseen. (The reason for being) This is for God to know and for us to take his Word for, therefore science and faith can co exist quite well but, because they exist as two separate basic statements each with its own exclusive narrative, cannot logically be used to disprove each other.
I accept one as a useful tool for facts of life and the other the only way for real life, the only Truth.
No. Because I would need to use your system of belief to disprove it otherwise my argument would be invalid.
At the end of the day there is no argument I can give that would make you open your eyes to God. God can soften your heart but you have to choose to let him into your life.
And finally why do you fear that I may pray for you, surely if God does not exist my praying would be inconsequential?
Do we all fear God just a little bit even if he doesn't exist.
Lots of love Dave
|
|
|
Post by lawrencebevan on Oct 19, 2009 22:22:37 GMT
Dave
there seems to be 3 discussions evolution, science vs religion and my faith or the lack thereof. They overlap.
I agree that science cannot prove a fact only high probability. The field of methematics is an exception - Pythagorus's theorem is pretty concrete - not much probability about the sides of a triangle.
Often however this evidence can be overwhelming as in the case of natural selection and thereby evolution. Thus many "theories" can be regarded as fact. I cant prove the pixies didnt push the apples down on to Newtons head but if they did they did it in a very exact and repeatable way.
You seem to be saying because the concept of god in non-falsifiable ie it cannot be proven or unproven we must accept it as fact. Surely this is contradictory. Much like the pixies whilst this could be held up as an explantion that defies efforts to disprove or prove we can come up with better explanations for the origins and descent of life.
My eyes are open, my heart has been soft on many occaisions! being as there is a high probabililty there is no god i doubt he will enter my life. If he does turn up then I hope he's in a new testament mood not old ! (which god is yours the new or the old?)
Re the prayers I dont fear them but they are inconsequential so I dont want you to waste your time mate.
I wont go into how your love for me is potentially going to incur the wrath of homophobic old testament god because we arent discussing the many contradictions in the "good" book. :-)
|
|
|
Post by davidsmith on Oct 20, 2009 19:40:51 GMT
Dave there seems to be 3 discussions evolution, science vs religion and my faith or the lack thereof. They overlap. I agree that's why I posted in the break room, very informal and impromptu. However without your lack of faith there would be no argument so the three are not mutually exclusive I think. Without passionate opinion there can be no change of view, if you were indifferent to any view there would be no chance of changing your mind. I agree that science cannot prove a fact only high probability. The field of methematics is an exception - Pythagorus's theorem is pretty concrete - not much probability about the sides of a triangle. This is true but only because maths is a science that uses deductive reasoning, which, where the propositions are true and the argument valid can only return a true conclusion. The inductive method employed by the scientific method can only make probability statements about the conclusion of an argument. Therefore the more premise there are that that support the conclusion the more probable it is that the argument supports the theory. Neither deductive or inductive reasoning can be rigorously applied to evolution theory. Evolution theory is the product of intuitive reasoning or more unkindly - speculation. Often however this evidence can be overwhelming as in the case of natural selection and thereby evolution. Thus many "theories" can be regarded as fact. I cant prove the pixies didnt push the apples down on to Newtons head but if they did they did it in a very exact and repeatable way. You seem to be saying because the concept of god in non-falsifiable ie it cannot be proven or unproven we must accept it as fact. Surely this is contradictory. Much like the pixies whilst this could be held up as an explantion that defies efforts to disprove or prove we can come up with better explanations for the origins and descent of life. I didn't say that, What I did say (in not so many words) was that the paradox of science is that by its own system it cannot allow the acceptance of an entity unless there is some way to measure its existence i.e. by its cause or its effect. Gravitational force is a good example it cannot be experienced directly by any human sense but its effect, which can be measured and experienced, shows or indicates its existence. We accept that our experiences represent reality and therefore truth. It is convenient for us to do this, otherwise it would be difficult to interact with the world. This is the value of science and yet, even tho millions of people through out the world with nothing to gain in human terms testify to the truth of God by their own experience, science will not allow God's existence until he fulfils the rules and criteria of the scientific method. This is impossible and would completely negate the power of faith and love. Did you say to your wife before getting married, "prove to me that you love me and will never be unfaithful then I will love you and marry you" I doubt it (assuming you are married, but the example stand) I expect you loved her faithfully and entered into a marriage relationship without the need for proof of fidelity. You just knew, you just believed you had faith in your wife. This is how it is for God faithful relationship from both parties. This is the only way a marriage can survive and the marriage concept is the cornerstone of Christian faith.This concept occurs again and again throughout the bible as does, by the way, the retribution for unfaithfulness - God rebukes Israel again and again but also forgives and returns love again and again. This is the Love story of the Bible, the story of God's unending love and faithfulness for his lost children and his joy and longing for their return home, his unending quest to guide them like a father to their promised land. A story of selfless giving and perfect sacrifice to fulfil this promise. There was and never will be a greater story of love and sacrifice in all time.
We accept gravity because of its effect even tho we cannot experience gravity itself and yet we (well not me but you :-)) - people - daily see the effect of God and cannot allow any possibility of His existence. Does this seem a little absurd? I know 14 months ago I would have had the same opinion as you Lawrence, what made me change so radically - I'll tell you, God made himself known to me and he is wonderful, but so much more - this is free information without prejudice. And I say seek him out while you can, you have time but not for ever. You just need to ask, nothing to lose and everything to gain. Why wouldn't I tell you this, it would be the most selfish act to keep it to myself and in fact a sin to do so.
The paradox of God's Word is that you cannot understand it in all its glory until you have faith, once you have faith the bible becomes the most fascinating, intriguing, compelling book you will (I have) ever read. Without faith it is full of contradiction, and anger and law and constraint and self importance etc etc, this is because we project human thought into God's word. In fact when read with faith it builds relationship with God and reveals itself as truth, love and freedom forever. What science book have you read that ever did those things. This is why God's word is so powerful and yet at the same time so repugnant to the unfaithful. The truth reveals who we are as a human and it is scary. With God's love and grace (Amazing Grace - Look it up on you tube) and the guidance of Jesus Christ as our friend and saviour we overcome our fear and evolve into loving beings who ascend and aspire to Christ the pure heart. And all you have to do is ask, sincerely ask you will be accepted without question into his loving arms and into God's great kingdom My eyes are open, my heart has been soft on many occaisions! being as there is a high probabililty there is no god i doubt he will enter my life. If he does turn up then I hope he's in a new testament mood not old ! (which god is yours the new or the old?) Re the prayers I dont fear them but they are inconsequential so I dont want you to waste your time mate. I wont go into how your love for me is potentially going to incur the wrath of homophobic old testament god because we arent discussing the many contradictions in the "good" book. :-) Your understanding of the Word of God (bible) is, understandably, about as good as my understanding of genetics, but as your argument causes me to investigate your statement so I expect will mine induce you to, which is good.
So as my understanding and love of God increases I freely and hopefully give you this message in the hope that you to will be found by the Holy Spirit, he there you just have to let the scales fall from your eyes to see. And the great thing is you can still have science, God loves an enquiring mind.With love and no apologies, Dave
|
|
|
Post by lawrencebevan on Oct 21, 2009 21:58:17 GMT
here's the thing
1 god apparently made me in his image 2 i employ reasoning and thus reject concepts without proof, if i am his image he works the same way 3 god is a concept without proof, why would he expect me to accept this?
Im glad this debate is on the net and not the doorstep!
L
|
|
|
Post by davidsmith on Oct 22, 2009 13:22:16 GMT
here's the thing 1 god apparently made me in his image 2 i employ reasoning and thus reject concepts without proof, if i am his image he works the same way 3 god is a concept without proof, why would he expect me to accept this? Im glad this debate is on the net and not the doorstep! L 1) Yes God did make man, the original man in his image, but we fell from grace thru Adam and now we are a broken, contaminated version of the perfect man. 2) Due to 1) we reason and think concomitantly with our innate imperfectness. 3) There is much proof if we could only open our eyes, hearts and minds to see it. We see that in science experience = truth within the perception frame of humans. I, like many many others have experienced God or at least the effects of God's Grace and Holy spirit. So either we are liars or have mental illness or we tell the truth about our experience. If I tell the truth then isn't the experience true and so therefore the cause of that experience must also be true. Deacartes wrote"There must be at least as much reality in a cause as there is in its effect". (The blue print of a clock must have as much reality as the clock derived from it) "The cause of the idea of God must possess at least as much reality as its effect" Hence God must exist because of our idea of God." There are many many things we accept as truth based on other peoples experience without ever experiencing them as an individual. We base our decision to believe on nothing more than intuition since we cannot do all the research to make a judgement about the probability we rely on our peers or superiors to inform us of what it is that is 'true'. I have to freely admit without the intervention of the Holy Spirit in to my life then I would not believe just because of others experience and testimony. Whether this non-acceptance would be a logical or rational decision is open to debate. For me God is the ultimate reality the only real truth and yet that can be very confusing and frustrating since my logical mind does not always want to accept the Word of God. But once God is a reality the so must be the Word of God. Am I a liar? If one million people personally told you they had experienced God thru the Holy Spirit would you still repeat a million times " there's no proof" There are millions who have this experience! Yet, by a process of reasoning (ordered thought) a scientist can tell you that a certain rock strata is millions of years old and you would believe him or that lifeless minerals became life spontaneously by some unexplainable process and you believe him, when there is no proof. Yet you cannot believe millions? This is where choice comes in the only truth for us is what we choose to believe is true. It is convenient to believe in the big bang and evolution because the alternative makes us face who we might be and what our ultimate responsibilities are. We are not the ultimate being in ultimate control of ourselves, scary eh? At the end of the day only we / you can choose and nothing I can argue will make you do that, but it will make you think about choices and maybe make you ready to accept the choice when the time is right. All the best Dave
|
|
|
Post by blinda on Oct 28, 2009 22:16:38 GMT
Quite. Interesting discussion guys. I couldnt possibly comment myself as I need the security of a doorframe around me
|
|
|
Post by davidsmith on Nov 4, 2009 18:45:46 GMT
"And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true." Tennyson - Idyll of the Kings
|
|
|
Post by blinda on Nov 4, 2009 22:00:39 GMT
Oxymoron
|
|
|
Post by ianl on Nov 5, 2009 11:00:29 GMT
Hi Dave An interesting journey you have started on. All the best.
Ian
|
|