|
|
#21
05-21-2005, 01:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Don't you find that a rather unimaginative ambition for a great higher being? [/ QUOTE ] You find the universe, man, human history unimaginative? [/ QUOTE ] Why not try to answer the question instead of trying to divert our attention? GG 
|
|
#22
05-21-2005, 01:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
What has science done to benefit society?
What has religion done? and I'm not going to engage you beyond that. Your posts demonstrate a mind that is so warped by fundamentalism as to be beyond repair
|
|
#23
05-21-2005, 01:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
What has science done to benefit society? [/ QUOTE ] Presented us with gunpowder, biological and nuclear weapons. [ QUOTE ] What has religion done? [/ QUOTE ] Established universities, hospitals and charitable institutions. Your mind is so brainwashed by fundamental humanism as to be almost beyond repair.
|
|
#25
05-21-2005, 06:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
It seems to me that David's thinking is a great example of how people have integrated the metaphors of science into their conceptual framework in an uncritical way. Applying the metaphor of a Scientist with an Antfarm to the Creator fits that conceptual framework. But applying the metaphors of "Love" or "Life" does not. imo, This effect Science has had on us has not enriched us. Just the opposite in fact.
PairTheBoard
|
|
#26
05-21-2005, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
Existence has no explanation. The mysteries of today are immensely more complex than mysteries of a thousand years ago. So what? Answering with "God did it" provides very poor explanation and stifles inquiry. Perhaps it is better to answer "We don't know" or even "We are not yet smart enough to find out". But we can get smarter.
Note the rapid accumulation of knowledge. It is now apparent that our knowledge about Universe accumulates exponentially, while if you look at some period a thousand years ago it is not at all apparent. If our knowledge about the Universe keeps accumulating so fast, there is no reason to predict with 100% accuracy that humans or our intellectual descendants will not be able to produce all the things attributed to the biblical deity and more. When the miracle of resurrection is as cheap as a cell phone plan, how many people will be impressed with Jesus?
|
|
#27
05-21-2005, 09:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
Existence has no explanation. [/ QUOTE ] How do you know this? That statement has all the earmarks of dogmatism. Even more important, if it is true then existence is irrational with all that implies. [ QUOTE ] The mysteries of today are immensely more complex than mysteries of a thousand years ago. So what? Answering with "God did it" provides very poor explanation and stifles inquiry. [/ QUOTE ] I know of no one who gives a simplistic "God did it" without more. Christians don't deny that God uses "natural" means. It stifles no inquiry. [ QUOTE ] there is no reason to predict with 100% accuracy that humans or our intellectual descendants will not be able to produce all the things attributed to the biblical deity and more. [/ QUOTE ] As I've said, man's dream is to be god. Cf Genesis. [ QUOTE ] When the miracle of resurrection is as cheap as a cell phone plan, how many people will be impressed with Jesus? [/ QUOTE ] Start small by creating something out of nothing or turning water into wine. Work up from there.
|
|
#28
05-23-2005, 03:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
"Interesting to note that William was a Franciscan friar. Amazing how these stupid Christians keep advancing human knowledge." As I have said before, it was much more reasonable to be fervently religious hundreds of years ago. Today however, if I am not mistaken, a much higher percentage of Jewish and Asian people go on to get Phds in this country than Christian People, especially (I think) in technical fields. (Don't get confused by that wording please. If 60% of the Phds go to Christians and 30% to Jews and Asians, the second category is at least five times as likely to get one). The explanation for this is either that Christians are less intelligent or (more likely) that their faith makes them less curious about finding the truth about things since they think they basically already know it. [/ QUOTE ] It is not that they aren't seeking higher education. Christians are NOT as intelligent as Asians or Jews.
|
|
#29
05-23-2005, 12:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Existence has no explanation. [/ QUOTE ] How do you know this? That statement has all the earmarks of dogmatism. Even more important, if it is true then existence is irrational with all that implies. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know that. I really don't know that existance has no explanation. I am just not satisfied with your explanation or any other ones currently on the market. [ QUOTE ] The mysteries of today are immensely more complex than mysteries of a thousand years ago. So what? Answering with "God did it" provides very poor explanation and stifles inquiry. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I know of no one who gives a simplistic "God did it" without more. Christians don't deny that God uses "natural" means. It stifles no inquiry. [/ QUOTE ] Christians are obligated to accept reality just like other sane people. It is only when the answers in dispute, uncertain, without explanation, or non-existant, that you drag out god as your explanation. I am saying that we don't know (yet?). [ QUOTE ] there is no reason to predict with 100% accuracy that humans or our intellectual descendants will not be able to produce all the things attributed to the biblical deity and more. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] As I've said, man's dream is to be god. Cf Genesis. [/ QUOTE ] You are most likely correct about that dream. But man cannot be god. Man is too limited and lacks room for growth. If a man finds a way to be god, man will cease to be man [ QUOTE ] When the miracle of resurrection is as cheap as a cell phone plan, how many people will be impressed with Jesus? [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Start small by creating something out of nothing or turning water into wine. Work up from there. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Something is created out of nothing all the time. Do a search on virtual particles. Water into wine transformation is really unnecessary. The vine farmers will cry foul. They produce enough of it as it is. Wine is just spoiled grape juice anyway. Forget the cheap parlor tricks. If you dream to be god, you got to think big
|
|
#30
05-23-2005, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The first flaw in Sklanskyanity
[ QUOTE ]
The explanation for this is either that Christians are less intelligent or (more likely) that their faith makes them less curious about finding the truth about things since they think they basically already know it. [/ QUOTE ] I have never seen any evidence for the former, but the latter I think is likely. While I'm not necessarily convinced it's the main reason, I can't imagine it doesn't have more than just a minor effect.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
