Originally posted by black beetle
Hey Rabbie my trusty feer,
I hope you and yours all fine!
Oh I had the feeling that the theologians are just preaching out of the blue and that their preaching has nothing to do with science and philosophy, but maybe this is an error of mine.
Well, what exactly did the theologians observed and by which means, and how did they came into the conc ...[text shortened]... me in full the details of this specific theory of reality) is definately the absolute truth?
😵
it strikes me beetle that what we are dealing with are perceptions, if i get the sense of what you are stating in your post to Bosse, please correct me if i am wrong. Thus it is with those theologians who would try to utilise the science as a vehicle to explorate and also at the same time give credence to their theology. The ancient record, which forms a basis for their faith, states it this way, '
(Romans 1:20) . . .For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward,
because they are perceived by the things made. . .
thus, it seems to be as truly as you state that qualities may be perceived, through the senses and that these perceptions form the basis of the reality. Thus when one examines say the structure of a cell, one can see that it is both functional and orderly and well suited for its purpose. Thus the theologian finds evidence for his text, which states that,
(1 Corinthians 14:33) . . .For God is a God, not of disorder, but of peace.. . .
thus it seems to me that this reality is as good as any other reality, if the basis of this reality, is simply the perception through the senses. Naturally one may try the same with say science and the known 'facts', with relation to the universe, or with any other claim, thus science becomes not the enemy, but the friend. Absolute truth, mmm, i do not think that it is possible to establish the case for.😵