by jambon1 319 Replies latest jw friends
That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact - Vidqun
You can't be serious.
No reputable scientist would resort to ascribing supernatural forces to explain anything. Not even theoretical physicists.
Methodological naturalism is the bedrock of the scientific method.
Scientists assume there is a natural cause even they never discover what it is. As soon as you introduce talk of the supernatural you have stopped doing science.
Seems like I should rather have said: More astronomers belief in God than e.g., biologists and geologists.
Yes - I think that is more acurate statement.
Jastrow was agnostic and not a believer. His statement below puts the one you quote into context......
"Some say still that if the astronomer cannot find that cause today, he will find it tomorrow, and we will read about it in the New York Times when Walter Sullivan gets around to reporting on it. But I think the circumstances of the Big Bang-the fiery holocaust that destroyed the record of the past-make that extremely unlikely.
This is why it seems to me and to others that the curtain drawn over the mystery of creation will never be raised by human efforts, at least in the foreseeable future. Although I am an agnostic, and not a believer, I still find much to ponder in the view expressed by the British astronomer E. A. Milne, who wrote, 'We can make no propositions about the state of affairs [in the beginning]; in the Divine act of creation God is unobserved and unwitnessed.' "
Super natural spiritual creationism is an easy offering answer, where there is an abundance of ignorance of the world we live in.
If god created all the animal species since the beginning of the earth's existence, he is one atrociously sadistic and cruel creator.
This video is for Sab.
The video starts out with "Do you believe in Zeus" of which the answer given is "no." However I would reply, "yes I do believe in Zeus" which would make my conversation go a very different direction.
If god created all the animal species since the beginning of the earth's existence, he is one atrociously sadistic and cruel creator.
...unless suffering is required for the process of righteousness. In that case God would be considered a genius. He's the only one that can sit through the torture because he knows it ends in happiness.
-Sab
God would be considered a genius. He's the only one that can sit through the torture because he knows it ends in happiness. - Sab
Get out your philosphical Ivory Tower and take a look at real suffering.
Have you any idea how self-satisfied and smug you sound when you say things like that? Obviously not.
The video starts out with "Do you believe in Zeus" of which the answer given is "no." However I would reply, "yes I do believe in Zeus" which would make my conversation go a very different direction.
Ditto if you tried it at a job interview! :-).
I can't help the mental connection i'm now making between SAB and Eggnog. Similar powers of reason, logic and argument.
No wonder EP quit.
http://youtu.be/4aVUrGO97Zg - video on tse tser
...unless suffering is required for the process of righteousness. In that case God would be considered a genius. He's the only one that can sit through the torture because he knows it ends in happiness.
I never realized your so mentally twisted and lack such a balanced rational sense of reasoning .
The mental health officials who diagnosed you as being mentally sick were right in their diagnoses.
According to the information you've provided while on this forum.
I can only say I hope you well into the future.
Stirs up thoughts that make me wonder if you coming here wasn't that all good for you.
Sab,
The definition of a paradox is a paradox. They are unexplained,....
Definitions in Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged range from, "A statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory, but in reality expresses a possible truth" to simply "An opinion or statement contrary to popular opinion."
You've waxed almost philosophical over something that can be defined in as little as eight words and I think that illustrates the frustration some people are experiencng on this thread. I can tell that you like to think deeply about "life, the universe and everything," but discussion becomes impossible when those personal thoughts and philosophy supplant the common points of definition that we all have to agree on.
I am flattered you believe my ideas to be a challenge in any light. Not for you, but for anyone
I said, "I think you might be too beleaguered" as in "Attacked from all sides, Under seige, Surrounded." I've taken unpoplular positions on internet discussion forums before and I understand that it's difficult to give each counter proposition the attention it deserves while you're being 'gang tackled.' At the very least, it ends up taking way too much of your time.
During the course of this thread, you've seemed willing to accept that moral responsibility accompanies moral understanding. For example, while spiders don't understand the rule that you 'don't take more than you give,' humans do, or at least should
You also seem to accept that designers have responsibility for their designs. You mentioned the internal combustion engine and the fact that many deaths are associated with its use. However since heat engines have in the grand scheme of things probably saved far more lives than they have cost and enabled a standard of living and population level that would otherwise be unattainable the 'scales' more than balance. (Provided global warming doesn't eventually take us all. LOL)
You also seem willing at times to allow that these two principles would apply to God. The example of mosquitos came up and you pointed out that, yes mosquitos bite humans and spread disease, but mosquito larva are an important food source for fresh water fish, which are in turn a hugely important food source for humans and other animals. As with the internal combustion engine, things may ultimately balance out.
Where I don't follow you are the points where you seem to abandon those rules. As little boys, my brothers and I would sometimes put a black widow and a scorpion or a scorpion and a praying mantis in the same jar. A fight to the death would break out even before we had the lid screwed shut. I suppose we could have argued that all we did was put the potato(s) in the oven and set the knobs, but even as children, we knew that would have been a big fat lie. We were responsible for the situation we manufactured as is God if he exists.
