@galveston75 saidI've told you what the word means. If you choose to ignore that, then it's on you.
I see this is your favorite response now. Anyway look it up in any bible you have and if it's different, let me see it.
You can't just choose your own meanings for words. The writer decides, not the reader.
What was the highest grade level Charles Russell attained? Do you know offhand?
@suzianne saidThe word mean what it says it means.
I've told you what the word means. If you choose to ignore that, then it's on you.
You can't just choose your own meanings for words. The writer decides, not the reader.
What was the highest grade level Charles Russell attained? Do you know offhand?
Lol, what does a school education have to do with any of this? What education did all the others who wrote the bible have?
I didn't know there was a certain requirement. Are you sure you have the right education?
Anyway no where in the Bible does God ever say that any of us need a higher education in order to be accepted by God or do serve him. In fact his words in the Bible say it is meek hearted ones who are humble and look to help others spiritually. The opposite of those would be haughty, stuck up, non caring people.
Colossians 2:8
8 Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;
@sonship saidPaul Davies writes popular science books with titles like "The God Particle" this motivates him to write this stuff. I don't really care what the experts whose words you are cherry-picking say, this is my own point. The universe is what it is. Constants are a property of the theories we use to describe it. We would be incredulous if an artist was having a hard time mixing paints to get just the right shade to represent something he's painting and claimed that the object he intended to represent is therefore unlikely to exist. There is no fine tuning problem with the universe. Theories have fine tuning problems. We tend to look skeptically at theories whose parameter spaces are dominated by uninhabitable chaos.
@DeepThoughtFine tuning is not a property of the universe. It is a property of theories. Essentially if a theory requires its parameters to be very precisely selected in order to produce the physics we actually see then that is a strong indication that it is no good.
It seems like you want to so isolate your skill so as to inoculate it from having imp ...[text shortened]... u mind if the world recognizes the worth of the discoveries though they are "no good" to your game?
@deepthought said"We tend to look skeptically at theories whose parameter spaces are dominated by uninhabitable chaos."
Paul Davies writes popular science books with titles like "The God Particle" this motivates him to write this stuff. I don't really care what the experts whose words you are cherry-picking say, this is my own point. The universe is what it is. Constants are a property of the theories we use to describe it. We would be incredulous if an artist was having a hard time mi ...[text shortened]... We tend to look skeptically at theories whose parameter spaces are dominated by uninhabitable chaos.
What we say when claiming that there are constants, is there is some order, a frame work that is in place. I believe there is one in place in all areas of life from morality to space time. When we break these laws what really happens we find ourselves broken, not the laws themselves.
@kellyjay saidPretty awesome. But some will still complain that the earth is not perfect because of all the natural disasters that kills thousands each year. Why would a God create earth to be like this when it is still a dangerous place at times.
[youtube] WR51OrawqIg [/youtube]
8 mins 17 sec
Not long, but makes a point.
I'll start a new thread on this in the next day or so....
3 edits
Paul Davies writes popular science books with titles like "The God Particle" this motivates him to write this stuff. I don't really care what the experts whose words you are cherry-picking say, this is my own point.
I don't think you should dismiss his thoughts because of this.
Its easy to dismiss all words you don't like as being "cherry picked".
Probably you "cherry picked" somebody when telling me fine tuning is not a property of the universe.
Where is the line you draw when a formula suddenly crosses the threshold of being good and useful to physics?
When you filled a page with equations to explain to me gravity, were they useful to Physics ?
Is General Relativity over developed, over specified, to be a useful set of equations to the physicist?
The universe is what it is.
That is what some of us are noticing to our amazement.
All such statements are disqualified for reasons of being "cherry picked" ?
Constants are a property of the theories we use to describe it. We would be incredulous if an artist was having a hard time mixing paints to get just the right shade to represent something he's painting and claimed that the object he intended to represent is therefore unlikely to exist.
That's not what see going on in your effort. I think I see it more like an artist mixing colors to paint what he sees. But when he peers closely at the portrait, ooops, it turns out to be someone he was very much trying to avoid acknowledging.
His solution? The particular mixing of those colors is no good to his skill of painting things.
There is no fine tuning problem with the universe.
The "problem" is with the people who don't want to recognize evidence of Intelligent Design.
To those willing to look towards where ever the evidence leads, there is less of a problem.
Theories have fine tuning problems. We tend to look skeptically at theories whose parameter spaces are dominated by uninhabitable chaos.
Making yourself a skeptic, some people think, automatically causes one to appear wise.
I don't count "We're skeptical" as necessarily an indication of wise objectivity.
Really all I have seen you do hear is assure me that you'll plug up your ears when others of equal training as you remark that the fine tuning of many constants suggests a purposeful universe callibrated for higher life.
And here we are. Contemplating (some of us anyway) the meaning of why we are here.
You've just said to me that you intend to close your ears tight so as to ignore such voices.
@galveston75 saidIts a fallen world, broken in relationship with its creator being restored.
Pretty awesome. But some will still complain that the earth is not perfect because of all the natural disasters that kills thousands each year. Why would a God create earth to be like this when it is still a dangerous place at times.
I'll start a new thread on this in the next day or so....
@kellyjay saidWell, it's impossible to deviate from what is nomologically possible. However, regarding morality, your your sins shall find thee out point is true, with or without a God, for nonpsychopathic individuals. It's true for psychopaths if they are caught or if divine afterlife justice exists.
"We tend to look skeptically at theories whose parameter spaces are dominated by uninhabitable chaos."
What we say when claiming that there are constants, is there is some order, a frame work that is in place. I believe there is one in place in all areas of life from morality to space time. When we break these laws what really happens we find ourselves broken, not the laws themselves.
@deepthought saidMy point I believe it was to you earlier is that fixed laws show us the universe in how it is put together and what we know we can study due to how constant it is. Having something take place however briefly alters that, if true only shows us that something other than these laws are in play, something changed.
Well, it's impossible to deviate from what is nomologically possible. However, regarding morality, your your sins shall find thee out point is true, with or without a God, for nonpsychopathic individuals. It's true for psychopaths if they are caught or if divine afterlife justice exists.
Like CS Lewis example of money in the draw, we put in 10 pounds one day, 10 pounds the next and when we look at the draw the next day we see 3 pounds only. That doesn't mean the laws of arithmetic have been broken, only the laws of England. Someone did something and due to laws we can detect it was not a normal event, taking it out of the natural, to the supernatural.
@sonship saidSo you believe in a God of the gaps.
@DeepThoughtPaul Davies writes popular science books with titles like "The God Particle" this motivates him to write this stuff. I don't really care what the experts whose words you are cherry-picking say, this is my own point.
I don't think you should dismiss his thoughts because of this.
Its easy to dismiss all words you don't like as being "cherr ...[text shortened]... e.
You've just said to me that you intend to close your ears tight so as to ignore such voices.
4 edits
Matt Slick ( of www.CARM.org ) gives a good example of ID I think.
You have a room, In the room a table, Scattered on the table are a thousand coins totally mixed, chaotically thrown across the table.
You have cameras in the room.
You have cameras on the door leading in and out of that room.
In the morning the coins are in piles - all pennies together, all nickels together, all dimes, all quarters, all half dollars and all silver dollars in STACKS respectively.
The cameras recorded NO ONE ever entering into that room.
That intelligent design is evidenced in the arrangement of the coins is the best explanation. And that even though we have no earthly idea WHO could have possibly been in the room to do it.
Does someone disagree ?
3 edits
@kellyjay saidI wonder if this might be a "glass half empty" view and whether another view of the same scenery might exist: "glass half full and still filling" -- i.e., that we might be developing through competitiveness and viciousness toward greater awareness and conviviality, and maybe not all by our own efforts -- our part might be to agree to ride that developmental Current or swim with it, instead of resisting it for whatever atavistic reasons we might be holding on to.
Its a fallen world, broken in relationship with its creator being restored.
8 edits
@galveston75 saidJust want to say that I appreciate your mention of that particular verse from Paul. I think that verse also unfortunately applies to a lot of the verbiage deployed/wielded/propagated/splattered by people writing about Christianity, when really the most important aspects are non-verbal and non-intellectual (as I understand Christianity).
Colossians 2:8
8 Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;
I think some people get lost in the words and the joy of verbal battle instead of making the internal energetic gestures or acquiescences [not sure how to express that concept]. Or maybe it's like kids at the edge of a pool, ribbing each other and daring each other to jump in first. Who would want to do that, if it really means ego death and assenting to become a puppet or incarnation of God? Probably not too many egos. Well, that's understandable.
Also, about Paul: after years of thinking he was a manic busybody who derailed/distorted/invented Christianity (or all of the above!) I'm starting to think that it's good he is included in the NT.
It's just recently I learned that his choice of name when he changed it to Paul means "the small one," so he must have really had some kind of humbling experience and wasn't just an energetic, controlling egomaniac as he might appear to some, as he did to me.
@caesar-salad saidWell from a Christian perspective you have explained it well. It is our nature to strive and thrive getting what we can for what we think is best, or turn to our Creator and enter into His rest. One has us attempting to be worthy, attempting to get what we need and want, the other has us walking with our creator knowing He has it all under control, and He fills our cups to over flowing.
I wonder if this might be a "glass half empty" view and whether another view of the same scenery might exist: "glass half full and still filling" -- i.e., that we might be developing through competitiveness and viciousness toward greater awareness and conviviality, and maybe not all by our own efforts -- our part might be to agree to ride that developmental Current or swim with it, instead of resisting it for whatever atavistic reasons we might be holding on to.