Does your Theology Align with Reality?

by cofty 124 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  slimboyfat

  Is that supposed to be an answer? Other explanations can be ruled out by abuse.
• 

  Seraphim23

  Science shows us that colours are only different wavelengths of light but a wavelength isn’t colour. The difference between red and a wavelength is huge. Why does a specific wavelength look red or green I would suggest is not explainable by science because a wavelength and the experience of Red are two different things entirely. Science explains the wavelength and its relationship to other wavelengths, not why they appear as colours and not sound for instance. Indeed a minority of people do hear colours and see sounds, indicating that what we perceive as the nature of reality isn’t in some cases what we think it is. So how do we really know if any of our perceptions and observations is the only true correct interpretation? Science can’t answer this!
• 

  cofty

  Seraphim - This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
• 

  Seraphim23

  It does because it attempts to demonstrate that science cannot explain all of reality by definition, unless you discount experience as part of reality.
• 

  Comatose

  Seraphim is English your first language? I'm not being rude I am curious. I don't usually get what you are getting at.

  Slim I see what you mean when you post your questions... I get it, but honestly it just seems like your playing a little game instead of contributing. If god was playing a grand game on us and tricking us, then we still only have the falsified and faked evidence in front of us to work with. So we need to work with what we have.

  Cofty interesting topic. I feel completely different toward those that accept facts and find a way to allow faith to exist alongside it, than I do about those that deny facts and refuse to see the truth.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Slimboy, Descartes couldn't even state he was alive definitively (solipsism). He has some nice thought experiments, but his philosophy fails miserably with what we have observed. Of course, you could deny any and everything, but when it comes down to it, you wouldn't stop eating, breathing and going to work to gain sustenance just to prove one of these thought experiments, would you?

  But do you realise there is a difference between acting on the basis of a certain understanding and stating categorically it is true? Every time I step on an elevator I assume it is securely attached. That is not because I have a special insight into the nature of the matter and the reality of the elevator situation, it is because it is expedient to act on the basis that it is working properly. We all take such a pragmatic approach to everything in life or else we run into problems as you suggest. The problem is that some people imagine that they are not being merely expedient in their interactions with the real world. They imagine that they really know how things are 100%. Such certainty about the way things are, that the elevator is working properly for example, that the apparently reasonable response to anyone who suggests otherwise is to call them ignorant, stupid or a liar.
• 

  cofty

  SBF - You never make a contribution to a discussion apart from the mind-numbingly boring assertion that there are no facts. You prefer scoring points and playing sophormoric games.

  You can safely assume my words mean the same as the genarally every day accepted meaning unless I say otherwise. When I say the earth isn't flat for example, we don't have to define "earth", "isn't" and "flat".

  When I say it's 100% true that there was no Adam and Eve I have no interest in indulging your philosophical ramblings.
• 

  Nathan Natas

  Cofty asked the assembled multitude,

  "Does your Theology Align with Reality?"

  Speaking only for myself, I reply, "If it does, then you ain't got no Theology!"

  - - - -

  SlimBOYFAT asked, " How can you prove there was no Adam and Eve?" and " How can you prove there was no Adam and Eve?"

  Their bones are in my basement, that's how!
• 

  slimboyfat

  It is easier to ridicule another description than to provide your own.

  If not flat, then what is the earth would you say? Can you think of any description that does not admit some contradiction?

  Would it never make sense to call the earth flat? Suppose we were talking to aliens from a planet where huge mountains and valleys many miles deep cover the whole surface. If someone were to explain to those aliens that "the earth is flat" would that be a true or false statement?
• 

  prologos

  cofty, humans were made perfect, as were the plants and animals, all dying in their time. proof:

  we needed the tree of life to be different from the animals and extend life (as the talking snake story goes).

  The bible has it partially right: humans were made perfect (but through evolution, and that requires the removal, death of the previous not so fitting speciman). and humans in their mortal, dying state were pronounced "Very good"

  even protons and black holes are perfect but decay with time.

  Only time will be left after that.