|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Much of the problem in many debates which we have here centers around the definition and common usage of the words "know" and "truth".
They accuse you of being a troll because you tease them and stick to your own definitions and understanding of know and truth. They get frustrated because you seemingly won't allow the scientific method to stick to its own definitions.| You and I differ in that you have so much of your internal validity of *your* definitions of knowing, knowledge, absolute truths vs tentative truths pending evidence all wrapped up in creationism as a way to "prove" God. I consider it a minor issue, unlike Ken Ham who insists that a literal Genesis is imperative for belief and for "science" as he understands it."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
My theory is that he insists on sticking to his definitions of know and truth.
He keeps trying to get everyone here to consider his definitions, where it is evident that you are more than comfortable and 90+% confident of your own. At least that's how I see it. Add byu Edit: Ask a believer if they *know* God. Then ask them if they know everything about God. If they say, no, remind them that science only knows what the evidence shows to a high probability and not a 100% truth claim. Only religion insists on 100% claims."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Are you a troll or an idiot? Are those my only choices?"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
ringo writes:
I was thinking about the jargon of believers and where they picked it up. French has separate words for knowing something (savoir) and knowing somebody (connaitre). To clarify, "believers" need not be YEC Creationists nor do they need to be familiar with the scientific method, though it is helpful. I settled on Vine's Dictionary of Biblical Words and further elaboration from Strongs Concordance. It may be enlightening to see where the original Greek and Hebrew defines the jargon.
Strongs writes: TO KNOWA. Verb. nakar OT:5234, "to know, regard, recognize, pay attention to, be acquainted with." This verb, which is found in both ancient and modern Hebrew, occurs approximately 50 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. The first time is in Gen 27:23: "...he did not recognize him" (RSV).The basic meaning of the term is a physical apprehension, whether through sight, touch, or hearing. Darkness sometimes makes recognition impossible Ruth 3:14. People are often "recognized" by their voices Judg 18:3. Nakar sometimes has the meaning "pay attention to," a special kind of recognition: "Blessed be the man who took notice of [KJV, "took knowledge of"] you" Ruth 2:19, RSV. This verb can mean "to be acquainted with," a kind of intellectual awareness: "...neither shall his place know him anymore" Job 7:10; cf. Ps 103:16.The sense of" to distinguish" is seen in Ezra 3:13: "...the people could not discern the noise of the shout of joy from the noise of the weeping of the people...." yada` OT:3045, "to know." This verb occurs in Ugaritic, Akkadian, Phoenician, Arabic (infrequently), biblical Aramaic, and in Hebrew in all periods. This verb occurs about 1,040 times (995 in Hebrew and 47 in Aramaic) in the Bible. Essentially yada` means: (1) to know by observing and reflecting (thinking), and (2) to know by experiencing. The first sense appears in Gen 8:11, where Noah "knew" the waters had abated as a result of seeing the freshly picked olive leaf in the dove's mouth; he "knew" it after observing and thinking about what he had seen. He did not actually see or experience the abatement himself. In contrast to this knowing through reflection is the knowing which comes through experience with the senses, by investigation and proving, by reflection and consideration (firsthand knowing). Consequently yada` is used in synonymous parallelism with "hear" Ex 3:7, "see" Gen 18:21, and "perceive, see" Job 28:7. Joseph told his brothers that were they to leave one of their number with him in Egypt then he would "know," by experience, that they were honest men Gen 42:33. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat of the tree whose fruit if eaten would give them the experience of evil and, therefore, the knowledge of both good and evil. Somewhat characteristically the heart plays an important role in knowing. Because they experienced the sustaining presence of God during the wilderness wandering, the Israelites "knew" in their hearts that God was disciplining or caring for them as a father cares for a son Deut 8:5. Such knowing can be hindered by a wrongly disposed heart Ps 95:10. Thirdly, this verb can represent that kind of knowing which one learns and can give back. So Cain said that he did not "know" he was Abel's keeper Gen 4:9, and Abram told Sarai that he "knew" she was a beautiful woman Gen 12:11. One can also "know" by being told-- in Lev 5:1 a witness either sees or otherwise "knows" (by being told) pertinent information. In this sense "know" is paralleled by "acknowledge" Deut 33:9 and "learn" Deut 31:12-13. Thus, little children not yet able to speak do not "know" good and evil Deut 1:39; they have not learned it so as to tell another what it is. In other words, their knowledge is not such that they can distinguish between good and evil. In addition to the essentially cognitive knowing already presented, this verb has a purely experiential side. The "knower" has actual involvement with or in the object of the knowing. So Potiphar was unconcerned about (literally, "did not know about") what was in his house Gen 39:6-- he had no actual contact with it. In Gen 4:1 Adam's knowing Eve also refers to direct contact with her-- in a sexual relationship. In Gen 18:19 God says He "knows" Abraham; He cared for him in the sense that He chose him from among other men and saw to it that certain things happened to him. The emphasis is on the fact that God "knew" him intimately and personally. In fact, it is parallel in concept to "sanctified" (cf. Jer 1:5). A similar use of this word relates to God's relationship to Israel as a chosen or elect nation Amos 3:2. Yada` in the intensive and causative stems is used to express a particular concept of revelation. God did not make Himself known by His name Jehovah to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He did reveal that name to them, that He was the God of the covenant. Nevertheless, the covenant was not fulfilled (they did not possess the Promised Land) until the time of Moses. The statement in Ex 6:3 implies that now God was going to make Himself known "by His name"; He was going to lead them to possess the land. God makes Himself known through revelatory acts such as bringing judgment on the wicked Ps 9:16 and deliverance to His people Isa 66:14. He also reveals Himself through the spoken word-- for example, by the commands given through Moses Ezek 20:11, by promises like those given to David 2 Sam 7:21. Thus, God reveals Himself in law and promise."To know" God is to have an intimate experiential knowledge of Him. So Pharaoh denies that he knows Jehovah Ex 5:2 or that he recognizes His authority over him. Positively "to know" God is paralleled to fear Him 1 Kings 8:43, to serve 1 Chron 28:9, and to trust Isa 43:10. "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Now, why would you reply like that? That is yet another example of trolling, Dredge. What do you hope to gain by annoying these guys?
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Dredge, my man! I thought of you as I read this article. For the record, I have nothing against the RCC as a group of people, but I will never elevate one Christian Church above any other.
As Christian nationalism digs in, differing views surface I have seen good and bad Popes. History is full of them. My personal favorite was John Paul II."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Not sure how to react to this post. Is this thinly veiled sarcasm? It falls flat in my mind.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Yes, of course. Just like God will still be imaginary not matter how many people believe in it. Allow me to correct that for you.God could be imaginary and no matter how many people believe it would be irrelevant. OR... God could actually exist, in which case no amount of science, philosophy, or supposed human evidence could wave Him away."A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Of course, your analogy is misleading and irrelevant. What's your point? We can measure the earth. We can observe it from space. Flatness is not an option. How does this relate to my assertion?
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** “…far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.”- Dr.John Lennox “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a Kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.” “The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” — Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
I've got a question.
Dredge writes: Darwin has been dead since 1882. Many other names have been associated with evolutionary theory since then. So why do critics of evolution always refer to the study as Darwinism? ...I love the gratuitousDarwinist propaganda... The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Dredge writes: Does this mean that you accept that some "Evolutionists" are intelligent? Or is there another motive for the acerbic wit being exchanged in this topic? Not everyone who accepts that life on earth has evolved accepts that neo-Darwinism offers a satisfactory explanation for that evolution. In other words, not all evolutionists are Darwinoids (aka Darwinists). By the way, I gave dwise1 a Post Of The Month in his response to you. You have to admit that he has a point.The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Theo writes: That's because Pythagoras lived from 580BC to 520BC before Jesus stepped out of eternity into time as a baby. Of course, you will demand evidence from me, which I don't have. My point was that you can't believe in someone before they were born. Pythagoras didn't believe in Jesus.The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Dredge writes: This sounded so outlandish that I had to investigate. I came up with Researchers trace the potato's origins, learn about its untapped potential. This superstition includes the hilarious belief that humans and potatoes, for example, evolved from the same organism. I kid you not ... that's what Darwinoids actually believe!! Am I missing something? Can you show me the source that led you to that conclusion?The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Taq writes: To be honest, I never understood Biblical Creationists much either. Of course, God *could* have tricked science, but why on Earth would He need to do that? ...ID/creationists aren't interested in explanations. They are interested in beliefs. Science, on the other hand, is all about explanations, beliefs be damned. My only beef with "scientists" is when they try and prove that Jesus never existed. Beyond that, I respect science. And is a guy who builds a biblical Theme Park near Cinncinati any wiser than a Hedge Fund Manager who has a bit of an ego and likes to write books? The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Dredge writes: Why would anyone conclude that? First of it violates Forum Guidelines . I'm sorry, APauling, but I've no choice but to conclude that you're a fool or you're mentally ill. Ive got one for you. Its the same guy I showed Kleinman. Watch his Schtick And tell everyone what you think of his conclusions. Im testing the spirits. Get back to us after watching it.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024