Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
could you spend the winter out side.
Topic Started: May 18 2009, 10:23 PM (949 Views)
the breeze
No Avatar
the breeze
[ * ]
Mike
May 19 2009, 06:43 PM
You guys are once again resorting to a straw man fallacy in addressing my posts. I have never said that evolution does not exist. That is an assumption on both of you. What I said was man was created by God as a separate species. and it appears from your answers that you cannot refute that fact. Or you would have.

And please, don't bring up science models. We all know now that science cannot answer questions with certainty.
you are wasting your time mike, Pertness and ignorance may ask a question in three lines which it will cost learning and ingenuity thirty pages to answer; and when this is done, the same question shall be triumphantly asked again next year, as if nothing had ever been written on the subject.”
Edited by the breeze, May 20 2009, 05:07 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"I believe when you have enough witnesses testifying to the same set of facts, that their subjective experience becomes objective. Thousands of years has presented us with enough testimony."

Sorry, but it doesn't.

For one, no two testimonies are alike. Eric and I have raised this issue many times, the differing beliefs among believers, and it's been ignored.

For another, the testimonies are from believers who believe what they saw had anything to do with God. Belief cannot establish truth.

For yet another, even if it could somehow be considered objective, you still have to deal with the problem of induction.

Other explanations derive from evidence.

Your explanation come first, then you look for evidence.


Mike, you're not addressing serious counterarguments. You're just brushing them aside with the magic broom of belief. I can;t argue against your belief, but neither is your belief an argument.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

the breeze
May 20 2009, 05:06 AM
Mike
May 19 2009, 06:43 PM
You guys are once again resorting to a straw man fallacy in addressing my posts. I have never said that evolution does not exist. That is an assumption on both of you. What I said was man was created by God as a separate species. and it appears from your answers that you cannot refute that fact. Or you would have.

And please, don't bring up science models. We all know now that science cannot answer questions with certainty.
you are wasting your time mike, Pertness and ignorance may ask a question in three lines which it will cost learning and ingenuity thirty pages to answer; and when this is done, the same question shall be triumphantly asked again next year, as if nothing had ever been written on the subject.”
At least he's man enough to try.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mike
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ * ]
All of what you said may be true Bruce. But this is a discussion forum and my belief and faith are never threatened by honest discussions. Heck, I was unaware of the DNA odds until i decided to do some research...based on these discussions.

I'm always open to learning things or other peoples perspectives..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mike
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ * ]
Chris
May 20 2009, 05:29 AM
"I believe when you have enough witnesses testifying to the same set of facts, that their subjective experience becomes objective. Thousands of years has presented us with enough testimony."

Sorry, but it doesn't.

For one, no two testimonies are alike. Eric and I have raised this issue many times, the differing beliefs among believers, and it's been ignored.

For another, the testimonies are from believers who believe what they saw had anything to do with God. Belief cannot establish truth.

For yet another, even if it could somehow be considered objective, you still have to deal with the problem of induction.

Other explanations derive from evidence.

Your explanation come first, then you look for evidence.


Mike, you're not addressing serious counterarguments. You're just brushing them aside with the magic broom of belief. I can;t argue against your belief, but neither is your belief an argument.
"I believe when you have enough witnesses testifying to the same set of facts, that their subjective experience becomes objective. Thousands of years has presented us with enough testimony."

Sorry, but it doesn't.

I disagree Chris. I can relate experiences I've had with God. another person relates experiences they had. A third does the same. Now granted, each is a different experience but each was an experience with God.

For one, no two testimonies are alike. Eric and I have raised this issue many times, the differing beliefs among believers, and it's been ignored.

I agree that there are many beliefs out there that differ. But I also know that God provided me with the Church and it's authority..in addition to the Holy spirit to discern and separate fantasy from facts. I think God was well aware of man's ability to wander, so he gave us a tool to overcome this human condition. And when you think about it, this makes perfect sense.

For another, the testimonies are from believers who believe what they saw had anything to do with God. Belief cannot establish truth.

Belief alone might not suffice with some, but when you add personal experience and outward showings witnessed by many, then truth becomes evident.

For yet another, even if it could somehow be considered objective, you still have to deal with the problem of induction.

Other explanations derive from evidence.

Your explanation come first, then you look for evidence.

You must be assuming that I never questioned the evidence or experiences. But I did, and over time I built a rock solid conviction. I spend hours upon untold hours in prayer and meditation over these issues. My faith has been hammered into fine steel.


Mike, you're not addressing serious counterarguments. You're just brushing them aside with the magic broom of belief. I can;t argue against your belief, but neither is your belief an argument.

I realize you can't argue against belief. And you question miracles. That is good Chris. I would worry for you if you were not questioning.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"Now granted, each is a different experience but each was an experience with God."

Begs the questions how you would know unless your saying each one has a personal relationship with a different God--but how would you know that?

San't argue beliefs here, Mike, you need to speak to what you know and can be known by anyone.


"But I also know that God provided me with the Church and it's authority."

Mike, you are far far from agreement with the Catholic Church. Aside from that, Mike, how do you know this?

No, not what you believe, what you know and that can be known by anyone.

"I think God was well aware of man's ability to wander, so he gave us a tool to overcome this human condition."

What tool? Only tool the Bible speaks of is reason.

" And when you think about it, this makes perfect sense."

It does? I don't even know what you're talking about.

"Belief alone might not suffice with some, but when you add personal experience and outward showings witnessed by many, then truth becomes evident."

Well, where's the evidence, even a shred.

Truth can only be determined by reason. Thus you need to present a reasonable argument. All I see are beliefs, sometimes disguised as knowledge. Knowledge can be shown, it can be explained, taught.

"You must be assuming that I never questioned the evidence or experiences."

No, I said you don't follow evidence to conclusions, but begin with conclusions and look for evidence. It's an obvious difference between scientific and theistic views.

"But I did, and over time I built a rock solid conviction."

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Conviction without evidence. Believing without knowing.

No, I'm not denigrating one and elevating the other. Bu just like rights and powers are two different things, so too are believing and knowing.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mike
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ * ]
Chris
May 20 2009, 06:04 AM
"Now granted, each is a different experience but each was an experience with God."

Begs the questions how you would know unless your saying each one has a personal relationship with a different God--but how would you know that?

San't argue beliefs here, Mike, you need to speak to what you know and can be known by anyone.


"But I also know that God provided me with the Church and it's authority."

Mike, you are far far from agreement with the Catholic Church. Aside from that, Mike, how do you know this?

No, not what you believe, what you know and that can be known by anyone.

"I think God was well aware of man's ability to wander, so he gave us a tool to overcome this human condition."

What tool? Only tool the Bible speaks of is reason.

" And when you think about it, this makes perfect sense."

It does? I don't even know what you're talking about.

"Belief alone might not suffice with some, but when you add personal experience and outward showings witnessed by many, then truth becomes evident."

Well, where's the evidence, even a shred.

Truth can only be determined by reason. Thus you need to present a reasonable argument. All I see are beliefs, sometimes disguised as knowledge. Knowledge can be shown, it can be explained, taught.

"You must be assuming that I never questioned the evidence or experiences."

No, I said you don't follow evidence to conclusions, but begin with conclusions and look for evidence. It's an obvious difference between scientific and theistic views.

"But I did, and over time I built a rock solid conviction."

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Conviction without evidence. Believing without knowing.

No, I'm not denigrating one and elevating the other. Bu just like rights and powers are two different things, so too are believing and knowing.
"Now granted, each is a different experience but each was an experience with God."

Begs the questions how you would know unless your saying each one has a personal relationship with a different God--but how would you know that?

San't argue beliefs here, Mike, you need to speak to what you know and can be known by anyone.

I have concluded this to be true by using reason and experience Chris. I wouldn't exist if God had not created me. And I do exist. How can I prove I exist to myself? By experiences. How do I know it is God who created me? Personal experience Chris. And then the preponderance of evidence becomes overwhelming when I have other witnesses testifying the same results.


"But I also know that God provided me with the Church and it's authority."

Mike, you are far far from agreement with the Catholic Church. Aside from that, Mike, how do you know this?

No, not what you believe, what you know and that can be known by anyone.

Once again Chris, by personal experience and a preponderance of evidence. From time to time questions do arise that need authorative discernment. This is what The Holy Father's job is. and of course I don't agree with every statement that comes from a bishop. I'm not required to, Nobody is.

"I think God was well aware of man's ability to wander, so he gave us a tool to overcome this human condition."

What tool? Only tool the Bible speaks of is reason.

Actually Chris, one should prepare themselves for bible study. And on questions that only the Church can answer, then those in the position must do the same. The Holy Spirit will not allow for the truth to be thwarted. Satan would love for that to occur.

" And when you think about it, this makes perfect sense."

It does? I don't even know what you're talking about.

Well I'm not prepared to give you an A-Z series of lessons here Chris. I've tried that approach before on forums only to end up with chaos. You can however, find Church instruction in San Antonio. If you would like, I will refer you to those in your area who can get the job done.

"Belief alone might not suffice with some, but when you add personal experience and outward showings witnessed by many, then truth becomes evident."

Well, where's the evidence, even a shred.

Did you read the miracle thread? if not, then read it. That involve more than a shred of proof. If you want me to provide a personal account, I would in a one on one conversation in person.

Truth can only be determined by reason. Thus you need to present a reasonable argument. All I see are beliefs, sometimes disguised as knowledge. Knowledge can be shown, it can be explained, taught.

I agree Chris that truth can be determined by reason. And I have presented you with some knowledge. You reject the knowledge, yet apparently cling to scientific arguments that are unsound and unprovable. I'm as frustrated as you in this conversation.

"You must be assuming that I never questioned the evidence or experiences."

No, I said you don't follow evidence to conclusions, but begin with conclusions and look for evidence. It's an obvious difference between scientific and theistic views.

I never stated that at all Chris. In reality the opposite is what occurred. I started as a skeptic and God made me a believer. Everybody who knows me, knows there is no bigger skeptic than myself. I have scars to prove it. LOL. Let me put it this way..i was the most unlikely of candidates for the priesthood.

"But I did, and over time I built a rock solid conviction."

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Conviction without evidence. Believing without knowing.

Oh, there is plenty of evidence Chris. but like i said, people for some reason won't see it or the motorcycle on the road.

No, I'm not denigrating one and elevating the other. Bu just like rights and powers are two different things, so too are believing and knowing.

I agree believing and knowing are two different things.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mike
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ * ]
I have to go to town. I'll check back with these threads later.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"I have concluded this to be true by using reason and experience Chris."

Then present you reasoning, Mike.

"How can I prove I exist to myself?"

Extreme skepticism is self-defeating.

"Personal experience Chris."

You personally experience this creation? Now you're talking fantasy.

"And then the preponderance of evidence becomes overwhelming when I have other witnesses testifying the same results."

But as you admit, none are testifying to the same thing.

"Once again Chris, by personal experience and a preponderance of evidence."

All subjective. Subjectivity as the source of truth leads to contradiction.

"The Holy Spirit will not allow for the truth to be thwarted. Satan would love for that to occur."

How do you know any of this. Provide your reasoning.

"I agree Chris that truth can be determined by reason. And I have presented you with some knowledge. You reject the knowledge, yet apparently cling to scientific arguments that are unsound and unprovable. I'm as frustrated as you in this conversation."

Good, on reasoning, but, Mike, you have not presented here any knowledge, only beliefs, no reasoning, only assertions.

I'm only frustrated that you continue to conflate belief and know.

"I never stated that at all Chris."

I didn't say you said it. I said it's obvious from what you say about your beliefs.

"I started as a skeptic and God made me a believer."

Good, then you should be able to take us step by step of your reasoning to your believing.

"I agree believing and knowing are two different things."

But you keep mixing them up.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

This discussion seems to be making some headway. I would summarize it thus: We have finally reached an understanding on the difference between believe and know. Mike, you believe God exists, God created the universe, etc, you do not know these things. It's not nitpicking fine meanings, but pointing out a meaningful difference of certainty. You believe with great conviction, and this conviction is based on personal (subjective) experience and testimonies by others of their personal (subjective) experiences. That may be well and good for belief, but isn't for knowledge, the truth of which must be objective. This is not to say science is any more certain in what it discovers. But guided by the scientific method it has the greater claim to knowledge.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis